Skip to main content

Full text of "The International standard Bible encyclopedia"

See other formats

^ r f ft I 1 

1| ,' Mi!? H" 

^ . -I' . 




Cornell University Library 
BS 440.159 

The International standard Bible encycio 

3 1924 008 045 423 »..« 

The original of this book is in 
the Cornell University Library. 

There are no known copyright restrictions in 
the United States on the use of the text. 

The International Standard 
Bible Encyclopaedia 


International Standard 
Bible Encyclopaedia 

JAMES ORR, M.A., D.D., General Editor 



MORRIS 0. EVANS, D.D., Ph.D., Managing Editor 






Copyright, 1915, by 
The Howard-Severance Company 

All Rights of Translation and 
Reproduction Reserved 

International Copyright Secured 

The Publishers supply this Kncyclopaedia only through 
authorized saJos-agents, Booksellers cannot obtain it. 

Printed by the Lakeside Press 

Types cast and set by the University of Chicago Press 

Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A. 


In presenting to the pubUc in completed form the volumes which comprise The International 
Standabd Bible Encyclopaedia it is fitting that an explanation should be given of the reasons for 
the appearance of so comprehensive a work, of its distinctive character and aims, and that some 
mention should be made of the principles by which the Publishers and Editors have been guided in 
its preparation. 

Most readers are aware that the last twenty years have been marked on both sides of the Atlantic 
—but in Britain chiefly— by a remarkable productivity in dictionaries and encyclopaedias of the 
Bible. Prior to that time the need of a new departure in Bible dictionaries had become acutely felt. 
The age was one of transition, of vast and rapid progress in knowledge, and the old aids to the study 
of the sacred Book no longer satisfied. The movement then already in process has gone forward 
steadily since, with the result that something Hke a revolution has taken place in our knowledge of 
Bibfical antiquity and still more in the prevailing methods of approaching and deaUng with Bibhcal 
subjects. While thus new needs have been created, the task of those entrusted with the preparation 
of new dictionaries and encyclopaedias of the Bible has been rendered increasingly difficult. It is 
a byword that things in theology are just now very much in fiux. The old landmarks are disappearing 
or at least are being considerably shifted. The Bible is passing through the ordeal of a remorseless 
and revolutionary criticism, and the singular fact is that conclusions which decades ago would have 
been condemned as subversive of all faith in its authority are now naturalized in large sections of the 
Church as the last and surest results of scholarship, to question which is well-nigh to put one's self 
beyond the pale of consideration — almost as if one denied the Copernican theory of the universe. 

The impulse to meet these new conditions has given rise, as above stated, to the preparation of 
numerous Biblical dictionaries and encyclopaedias, the chief of which have already taken their places 
as standard works in this department of scholarship. It is in no spirit of rivalry to these existing 
works that the present Encyclopaedia is produced. Able and scholarly as these earlier undertakings 
are, it is believed that there is room for yet another work of the kind, conceived on distinct lines, 
embodying the best scholarship and newest knowledge, yet somewhat less technical in character than 
the existing larger works, adapted more directly to the needs of the average pastor and Bible student, 
and therefore serving a purpose which the others do not so adequately fulfil. There are other con- 
siderations which have had weight in determining upon a production of this new work. 

As its title indicates, this Encyclopaedia aims at being "International." On the one hand, it 
may be claimed that, because it has been produced on American soil, and in considerable part under 
American care, it has been able to draw from a wider area, and to incorporate the fruits of a fuller 
and more representative American scholarship, than is possible in any British work; while on the 
other hand its connection through its chief editor with the Old World enables it to reap not less the 


benefits of some of the best learning of Britain and its Colonies, as well as of the Continent of Europe. 
How far this has been accomplished will appear farther on. 

The choice of the word Encyclopaedia as the principal one in the title of this work has also been 
made with a definite purpose. While very complete in its definition of words and terms as a 
dictionary, the larger function of the work planned by its projectors was to group and arrange data 
and information after the manner of an encyclopaedia. It will be observed, therefore, that the latter 
term more accurately describes the completed work. 

An important question in connection with a new reference work of this kind is the attitude to be 
assumed by its writers toward matters fundamental to the newer learning, in so far as the latter deals 
with the structure, critical treatment, inspiration, and authority of the Bible. Scholarship alone 
cannot be the deciding factor here, for the scholarship of different minds leads to widely different 
conclusions, determined often by the ultimate presuppositions on which the treatment of a subject is 
based. The spirit so widely prevalent in our day which rejects the idea of the supernatural in nature 
and history, and the criticism which proceeds on that basis, must reach entirely different results from 
those attained by that attitude of mind and heart which reverently accepts a true revelation of God 
in the history of Israel and in Christ. It is the former spirit which eviscerates Christianity of most 
of the vital truths which the Church, resting on Scripture, has always regarded as of its essence. With 
such a spirit, and with the treatment of Biblical subjects resulting from it, the present Encyclopaedia 
disclaims all sympathy. In fact, its general attitude may be described as that of a reasonable con- 
servatism. In harmony with most, though not all, recent works of the kind, this Encyclopaedia is 
positive and constructive in New Testament criticism and doctrine; on the other hand, while acknowl- 
edging the rights of a reverent Old Testament criticism, and welcoming any aids which such criticism 
may bring to the better understanding of the sacred Word, it differs from most of these ultra-modern 
works either in declining to accept the views of, or in adopting a more cautious attitude toward, the 
advanced WeUhausen school. Notwithstanding, the aim throughout has been to secure fairness of 
statement of all subjects on which marked differences of opinion prevail, and in such cases — e.g.. 
Baptism, the Eucharist, questions of church government, theories of criticism, etc. — it has been 
provided that the divergent views be presented in separate articles, each article being prepared by a 
leading exponent of the view set forth therein. 

In harmony with the practical and authoritative character of the Encyclopaedia the greatest 
pains have been taken to secure comprehensiveness and completeness in its presentation of all Bibhcal 
matters, and in its fulness of typical Scriptural references on all subjects dealt with. In scope the 
work embraces the Old and New Testaments and the Apocrypha, together with all related subjects 
of Language, Text, Literature (apocalyptic, apocryphal, sub-apostolic, etc.). Archaeology, historical 
and religious environment — whatever, in short, may throw light on the meaning and message of the 
sacred Book. The aim has been that nothing great or small conducing to this end shall be omitted. 
History of peoples and rehgions, Ethnology, Geography, Topography, Biography, Arts and Crafts, 
Manners and Customs, Family Life, Natural History, Agriculture, War, Shipping, Ritual, Laws, 
Sects, Music, and all else pertaining to the outer and inner life of the people of the Bible, and therefore 
throwing light upon the meaning of the original writers, are amply and minutely treated. Proper 
names are explained and their occurrences in the Bible and Apocrypha noted. Large space has been 
devoted to the meanings and uses of the more ordinary, as well as of rarer and obsolete, English words 
with special reference to their Hebrew and Greek originals and to the variations of usage in the 
Authorized Version and the Revised Versions. Careful attention has been given to the figurative 
uses of words in connection with all subjects where such uses occur. This feature alone of the Ency- 
clopaedia will render it of special value to ministers, teachers, and the rank and file of students of the 


Such being the general character and design of the Encyclopaedia, its preparation was entrusted 
to a staff of Editors and assistants whose scholarly attainments and known sjrmpathy with the objects 
to be attained furnished a guarantee that these plans would be effectively carried out in the com- 
pleted work. As General and Consulting Editor the Pubhshers secured the services of the Reverend 
Professor James Orr, D.D., of the United Free Church College, Glasgow, Scotland, and with him 
were conjoiued as Associate Editors the Reverend President Edgar Y. MulUns, D.D., of the Southern 
Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, Kentucky, and the Reverend Bishop John L. Nuelsen, D.D., 
of the Methodist Episcopal Church, now of Zurich, Switzerland. The duties of Managing Editor 
were committed to the Reverend Morris 0. Evans, D.D., of Cincinnati, Ohio; on him and his corps of 
skilled assistants has fallen the onerous task of seeing the work carried safely through the press. To 
the General and Managing Editors fell the preparation of the necessary lists of subjects and their 
grouping and classification; then, in conjunction with the Associate Editors, the assignment of these 
to suitable contributors. In this connection special care was exercised to give the work a genuinely 
international and representative character, not only by selecting contributors distinguished in their 
several departments from both sides of the Atlantic, and from the British Colonies and the Continent, 
but by seeing that these were chosen from the various sections of the Christian Church and, moreover, 
that in so far as possible the writers should be those altogether quahfied to produce the most satis- 
factory articles possible on the subjects assigned to them within the space allotted. In all, nearly 
two hundred contributors, many of them scholars of the highest rank, have been employed upon this 
work during the past six years. Over one hundred of these contributors are residents of the United 
States, about sixty of Great Britain and Continental Europe, and the rest, of Canada, Syria, India, 
Australia, and other countries. Inspection of the Index of Contributors will show how largely all 
Churches in the respective countries are represented in this Encyclopaedia. Anghcans, Baptists, 
Congregationahsts, Lutherans, Methodists, Presbyterians, with those of stiU other communions, 
diverse in name but united in the faith of the one Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and laboring in the 
interests of His Kingdom, have all willingly lent their aid in the production of this truly ecumenical 
work. Valued assistance also has been unstintingly rendered by a number of Jewish authors. A large 
proportion of the writers are scholars engaged in professorial work in leading Universities, Seminaries, 
and Colleges — a fact which greatly enhances the responsible and representative character of their 

It is not possible, and the attempt would be invidious, to particularize the share of the several 
writers in a work which is the product of so many scholarly pens. An examination of the Encyclo- 
paedia itself wUl reveal to the most critical eye such a wealth of scholarly articles as has seldom been 
made available to those in need of such a work. It will be sufficient to say that it was desired at the 
outset by the promoters of this Encyclopaedia that special prominence should be given to Archae- 
ology and the most recent findings of Exploration, in their bearings on the Bible, and on the lands and 
civilizations with which Biblical history is connected (Egypt, Babylonia, Assyria, Palestine, Hittites, 
etc.). How fully this end has been attained is seen in the fact that a large number of the foremost 
authorities, on Archaeology are contributors to these pages. In this connection deep regret must 
be expressed for the severe loss sustained to Biblical knowledge in general and to this Encyclopaedia 
through the lamented death, while the work was progressing, of Colonel C. R. Conder, whose acquaint- 
ance with BibUcal Archaeology and Palestinian Topography, equaled by few and surpassed by none, 
made his services of such special value. It is, however, a gratification that, before his decease. 
Colonel Conder had completed most of the articles for the Encyclopaedia assigned to him. 

In the treatment of the wide range of subjects opened up by the Natural History of the Bible, 
with kindred subjects relating to the Geology, Mineralogy, Agriculture, Trades and Industries, etc., 
also the Topography of Palestine, this Encyclopaedia is largely indebted to Palestinian contributors 


whose names occupy prominent places in the list. However, the Birds of the Bible are dealt with by 
a noted American writer, Mrs. Gene Stratton-Porter, whose stories and bird books have charmed 
multitudes of people all around the world. The abundant articles on Eastern customs, food, trades, 
marriage, family relationships, etc., are principally the work of American contributors. 

Embracing in the two Testaments well-nigh every species of literature, the Bible gives rise, even 
in external respects, to a multitude of questions which it is required of an adequate Encyclopaedia 
to answer. Such are questions of language, of manuscripts, of text, of internal arrangement, of the 
growth of the Canon, of Versions, of vicissitudes of literary history, then of chronology as frame- 
work, of diversity of contents, leading up to history and biography; all finally merging in the wider 
questions with which criticism proper has to deal. It is the aim of the present work to yield reliable 
and satisfactory information on all these important subjects. In several articles, such as " Religion in 
Ancient Greece," by Dr. A. Fairbanks, of the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, Massachusetts, and "The 
Roman Empire and Christianity," by Dr. S. Angus, the aim has been to give the true perspective 
and atmosphere to the Bible history. It is of the first importance that the reader should reahze the 
background and salient features of that history — have a clear conception of the mythological sys- 
tems and ancient world-powers with which Christianity had to contend and which it was destined 
to supplant. Several illustrations also will be found to serve the same end. 

The center of interest in the Bible must ever be the Lord Jesus Christ, to the consideration of 
whose life and teaching, as enshrined in the Gospels, and to the significance of whose Person, mission, 
and saving work, as further unfolded in the Epistles, large space in this Encyclopaedia is necessarily 
devoted. It was with great diffidence, and a deep sense of the responsibility of the task, that the 
principal article on Jesus Christ was undertaken by the General Editor. The treatment of the subj ect 
is guided by the conviction that, while critical discussion cannot be ignored, a simple and straight- 
forward presentation of the narrative of this transcendent life, in its proper historical and chrono- 
logical setting, is itself the best antidote to the vagaries of much current speculation, and the endeavor 
is made to give the article throughout a character which will render it inf ormatory and helpful to the 
average Biblical student. The same author is responsible for the articles on the Bible and on Criti- 
cism. On the latter subject, however, another article from a different standpoint is appended to the 
one by the General Editor. 

The articles on the greater doctrines and on doctrinal and ethical themes generally, as drawn 
from both Old and New Testaments, cover a wide range, and in all of these several departments of 
Biblical learning most painstaking effort has been put forth with such results as an examination of the 
Encyclopaedia itself cannot fail to reveal. 

It is essential to a good encyclopaedia that in addition to its scholarly execution it possess dis- 
tinctive outstanding features for the convenience and information of those who consult it. This 
Encyclopaedia is particularly characterized by the following features : 

I. Fulness. It has been the design of the Editors that every word in the Bible and the Apoc- 
rypha having a distinct Scriptural meaning should appear in this work; and also that all the doctrines 
of the Bible, the principal terms of Biblical criticism and related subjects of profane history, biog- 
raphy, geography, social life of the peoples, and the industries, sciences, literature, etc., should be 
included and given proper treatment. A much greater number of words and subjects are defined 
and treated in this Encyclopaedia than in any other work of its kind, as will be seen by comparison. 

II. Authority. In order that those who use such a work may be assured of its trustwortliiness 
it is necessary that the subject-matter should be identified with its authors. Therefore every article 
in this Encyclopaedia, of sufficient length to be regarded as more than a mere definition or notice, 
appears over the signature of its author. ■ Items of less than one hundred words are not signed, as 


so many signatures to short and relatively unimportant paragraphs would serve no valuable purpose, 
but would give a monotonous appearance to a page. It will be noted that the authors responsible 
for all the major subjects were selected and requested to write upon those particular themes because 
of their marked ability and recognized authority in the special departments of Biblical learning to 
which their articles belong. 

III. Accessibility. More frequently than otherwise those who consult an encyclopaedia desire 
to obtain information on only one or two points in an article and have neither the time nor inclination 
to read it throughout its entire length. To aid such busy readers, therefore, a uniform division of 
articles by the employment of headings and subheadings has been adopted. The principal divisions 
of articles are indicated by captions in bold-faced italics. Subordinate to this first class of divisions 
appears a secondary class of numerical headings known as cut-in heads, the text-matter being in- 
dented for their insertion. An illustration of these two headings follows : 

//. The Ordinance. — The "seats of doctrine," 
i.e. the Scripture texts which must be employed for 

determining every essential jjart of 
1. Source the teaching of Scripture regarding the 
and Norm second sacrament of the Christian 
of the Doc- church, are the words of institution 
trine of the recorded in Mt 26 26-28; Mk 14 22- 
Eucharist 24; Lk 22 19.20; 1 Cor 11 23-25. 

Valuable statements, chiefly concern- 
ing the proper use of the sacrament, are found in 
1 Cor 10 15 ff; 11 20 ff. That these texts are 

controverted is no reason why a doctrine should 
not be established from them. No doctrine of the 
Christian religion could be established, if every text 
of Scripture had to be withdrawn from the argument, 
so soon as it had become controverted. Jn 6 32- 
59 does not treat of this ordinance, because (1) 
the ordinance must be dated from the night of the 
betrayal, which was considerably after the Lord's 
discourse at Capernaum; (2) because this passage 
speaks of "eating the flesh," not the body, of the 
Son of man, and of drinking "his blood," in such 

The cut-in heads are followed by a third class of subject divisions indicated by plain Arabic 
numerals enclosed in parentheses as follows: (1), (2), (3). The reader will be further aided by 
a fourth class of subdivisions composed of the letters of the alphabet arranged in the following 
style: (a), (6), (c), etc. In a few exceptional instances other special methods of subdividing articles 
have been provided to suit particular cases. The principal divisions and subdivisions of each leading 
article appear in tabulated form as an outline or analysis immediately preceding the article itself, 
so that one may observe at a mere glance the general method of treatment of any particular subject, 
and also the relative place in the article in which any feature is located. 

IV. Illustrations. A large number of pictures, maps and charts, particularly adapted to illus- 
trating the text, serve the purposes both of instruction and embeUishment. While some of the 
illustrations are necessarily copied or redrawn from familiar subjects, by far the larger number are 
reproductions of recent photographs. Many of these latter were obtained by the PubUshers through 
their own special representatives who either made the photographs themselves or collected them from 
many available sources at great outlay of time and money. The Editors and Publishers are under 
special obligation to many authors and interested friends who have procured from others or loaned 
from their own private collections many rare pictures which have been used. Among others who 
have thus unselfishly aided in the production of this work special mention should be made of the 
following persons: the Reverend A. E. Breen, D.D., of Rochester, New York; Professor Albert T. 
Clay, of Yale University; Professor A. E. Day, of the Syrian Protestant College, Beirut, Syria; 
Professor A. C. Dickie, Manchester, England; the Reverend William Ewing, D.D., Edinburgh, 
Scotland; Dr. Arthur Fairbanks, Director of the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, Massachusetts; the 
Reverend M. G. Kyle, LL.D., Professor in Xenia Theological Seminary, Xenia, Ohio; Dr. E. C. 
Richardson, Librarian at Princeton University; the Reverend Professor George L. Robinson, of 
McCormick Theological Seminary, Chicago; the Reverend Professor G. H. Trever, D.D., of 
Gammon School of Theology, Atlanta, Georgia; and Mrs. W. J. Williams, Cincinnati, Ohio. 


V. Maps. At some places in the text maps are used for illustration. The colored maps, which 
comprise an atlas, are grouped at the close of the fifth volume for convenience in reference. They 
have been drawn under the immediate supervision of the Reverend Professor George L. Robinson, 
of McCormick Theological Seminary, Chicago. The index, which precedes the atlas, renders the 
location of all identified places easy. 

VI. Cross-References and Indexes. Although the alphabetical arrangement of an encyclo- 
paedia enables one using it readUy to locate its principal subjects, it is possible to obtain all the infor- 
mation concerning any theme only by an acquaintance with all the articles in which that theme 
appears. A system of cross-references extensively used throughout this work leads the reader to the 
various articles which give information on any given theme or subject. A little overlapping or 
repetition has occasionally been allowed to save readers the trouble of referring too frequently from 
one article to another. To aid further those who use this work to locate immediately any fact or 
particular contained in the Encyclopaedia there are seven indexes as follows: I. Contributors; 
II. General Subjects; III. Scripture Texts; IV. Hebrew and Aramaic Words; V. Greek Words; 
VI. Illustrations; VII. Index to the Atlas. 

In the pronunciation of proper names and English words the international character of the 
work has not been overlooked. Great care has also been exercised in view of the doubts and diffi- 
culties attaching to the derivation of proper names. The American Standard Edition of the Revised 
Version of the Bible, copyright 1901 by Thomas Nelson & Sons, New York, by consent of the 
owners of the copyright, has been made the standard English text of the Bibhcal quotations and 
references where not otherwise indicated; the writers, however, have enjoyed full liberty in the use 
of other versions or in giving their own translations and paraphrases. 

The Editors and Publishers have not spared time, painstaking care or expense in their efforts 
to produce an Encyclopaedia in every way adequate to the exacting requirements of teachers in 
colleges and theological seminaries and Bible schools, clergymen, and all others who desire to be 
famihar with the Holy Scriptures and those themes of doctrine, criticism, and scholarship which are 
directly related to them. 







ad loo. 





al. (alii) 



Am Tab 



Ap Lit 


Apos Const 


























Codex Sinaiticus 

Codex Alexandrinus 

'Abhoth, Pirlfe 


at the place 

Ancient Hebrew Tradition 

American Journal of Semitic Lan- 
guages and Literatures 

American Journal of Theology 




American Palestine Exploration Fund 

Tell el-Amarna Letters 

Clay, Amurru, the Home of the 
Northern Semites 


Josephus, Antiquities 

Winckler, Altorientalische For- 

Apocalyptic Literature 


Apostolical Constitutions 






American Standard Revised Version 

American Revised Version, margin 



theoretical or unidentified forms 

Altes Testament 

Authorized Version (1611) 


Codex Vaticanus 


Brown, Driver, and Briggs, Hebrew 
and English Lexicon of the OT 

Bezold, Catalogue of the Cuneiform 
Tablets in the Ko{u)yunjik Collec- 
tion of the British Museum 


Josephus, Jewish Wars 


Robinson, Biblical Researches 

Bibliotheca Sacra 

Bible Student and Teacher 

G. A. Smith, Book of the Twelve 

Biblical World 

c, cir 










CH {St P) 





cod., codd. 


















ed, edd 
Eerd St 
Enc Brit 

ep., epp. 


ERV . 

Codex Ephraemi 
circa, about 

Smith, Chaldean Account cf Genesis 

Josephus, Against Apion 

Covenant Code 

Cyclopedia of Education 



Code of Qammurabi 


Conybeare and Howson, St. Paul 

Corpus Inscriptionum 

Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum 

Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum 

Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum 

codex, codices 

commentary, commentaries 

Schrader, The Cuneiform Inscrip- 
tions and the OT 

Craig, Assyrian and Babylonian Re- 
ligious Texts 

died, denarius (penny) 

Deuteronomist, or Codex Bezae 

Later Deuteronomistic editors 

Smith, Dictionary of the Bible 

Dictionary of Christian Antiquities 

Dictionary of Christian Biography 

Hastings, Dictionary of Christ and 
the Gospels 




Deutsche Orientalische Gesellschaft 


Later additions to E 


Encyclopaedia Biblica 

edition, editions 

Eerdmans, Studien 



Encyclopaedia Britannica (11th ed) 


epistle, epistles 

Wiener, Essays in Pentateuchal 

Hastings, Encyclopaedia of Religion 
and Ethics 

English Revised Version 

English Revised Version, margin 


English translation 


et al. and others 

EV English Versions of the Bible 

expl. exploration 

Expos The Expositor 

Expos T Expository Times 

f , ff following (verse, or verses, page, etc) 

fern. feminine 

fig. figurative(ly) 

fl. flourished 

Fr. French 

fr from 

fr. fragment 

ft. foot, feet 

gal(s). gallon (s) 

OAP Buhl, Oeographie des alten Palastina 

GAS Smith, Modern Criticism and the 

Preaching of the OT 

GB or Gins- Ginsburg, New Massoretico-Critical 
burg's Bible Text of the Hebrew Bible 










HDB, 1 vol 




Hor Heh 


ib or ibid 








in loc. 









Winckler, Geschichte Babyloniens u. 


Gottingische gelehrte Anzeigen 
Gbttingische gelehrte Nachrichten 
Schiirer, Geschichte des Jiidischen 

Volkes (4th ed) 

Stade, Geschichte des Volkes Israel 
Law of Holiness (Lev 17-26) 
Hehraische Archaologie (Benzinger; 

Sayce, Higher Criticism and the 

Hastings, Dictionary of the Bible (five 

Hastings, Dictionary of the Bible (single 

Eusebius, Historia Ecclesiastica 
Smith, Historical Geography of the 

Holy Land 
Kuenen, History of Israel to the Fall 

of the Jewish State 

The Hibbert Journal 
Schiirer, History of the Jewish People 

in the Time of Jesus Christ 
Lightfoot, Horae Hebraicae 
McCurdy, History, Prophecy and 

the Monuments 
Gray, Studies in Hebrew Proper 

same place 

International Critical Commentary 
same person or author 
Wellhausen, Israelitische und judische 

Stevenson, Index-Lexicons to OT and 


in the place cited 
introduction (s) 

Later additions to J 
Journal of the American Oriental 

Journal of Biblical Literature and 


JD Jastrow, Dictionary of the Targumim, 

Talmudim and Midrashic Literature 

JDT Jahrbilcher filr deutsche Theologie 

Jeh Jehovah (Yahweh) 

Jerus Jerusalem 

Jew Enc Jewish Encyclopedia 

Jos Josephus 

jour. journal 

JPT Jahrbilcher filr protestantische Theo- 


JQR Jewish Quarterly Review 

JRAS Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 

KAT Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und 

das Alte Testament 

KB Keilinschrifaiche Bibliothek (Schra- 

der, editor) 

K're and 

■ Knhibh 

See art. Text of the OT 


Schrader, Keilinschriften und Ge- 




1., 11. 

hne, lines 






Thomson, The Land and the Book 


Robinson, Later Biblical Researches 

I.e. or loc. cit 

. in the place cited 






literature, or literally 


Driver, IntrodvA;tion to the Literature 



Clay, Light on the OT from Babel 


Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus 

the Messiah 



m or mg 







Maspero, Dawn of Civilization 


Winckler, Mitteilungen der Deutschen 



Middle English 








Moabite Stone 


Manuscript (s) 


Mas(s)oretic Text. See art. Text op 







no date 


Tristram, Natural History of the 

Levy, Neuhebraisches und chaldd- 


isches Worterbuch 


Neue Kirchliche Zeitschrift 




Natural Order 


New Testament 






Transactions of the International 

Congress of Orientalists 


Old English 


Oxford Hebrew Lexicon; see BDB 


Orientalistische Literatur-Zeitung 




Onk;elos (Targum) 

Onom or OS 

Eusebius, Onomasticon — Onom Sacr 


Wiener, Origin of the Pentateuch 

op. cit. 

in the work quoted 


Old Testament 

OT (Sept or 


Swete, OT in Greek according to Sept 


Smith, OT in Jewish Church 





part, or ptcp. 

pi., plur. 












R or red. 

r. or 1/ 

















Sept or LXX 



Priestly Code 

Secondary Priestly Writers 


Proceedings of the American Oriental 





Polychrome Bible 

Palestine Exploration Fund Memoirs 

PEF Quarterly Statement 



Peshito, Peshitta 

Wellhausen, Prolegomena to the His- 
tory of Israel 

Philistine (s) 



Cheyne, Complete List of the Proper 
Names in the OT and NT 

Orr, The Problem t)/ the Old Testament 

Hauck-Herzog, Realencyklopddie filr 
proiestantische Theologie und Kirche 




psalm (s) 

Wiener, Pentateuchal Studies 

Proceedings of the Society of Biblical 


Princeton Theological Review 

quoted by 

which see 

redactor or editor 


Revue biblique 

See PRE 

revised, or reviewed 

Schiele-Zscharnack, Religion in 
Geschichte und Gegenwart 


Records of the Past 

Revue semitique 

Revised Version (English and Amer- 

Revised Version, margin 




Miiller, Sacred Books of the East 

Wiener, Studies in Biblical Law 

Sacred Books of the Old Testament 

The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclo- 
pedia of Religious Knowledge 

Wright, Scientific Confirmation of 
the OT History 






sing. singular 

SK Studien und Kriliken 

sq. square, or the following 

StBD Standard Bible Dictionary 

subst. substantive 

s.v. under the word 

SWP Memoirs of the Survey of Western 


Syr Syriao 

t times 

Talm Tahnud 

text. textual 

Tg(s), Targ(s) Targum(s) 

TLZ Theologische Literaturzeitung 

TMH J. Dahse, Textkritische Materialen 

zur Hexateuchfrage 

tr translation, or translate 

tr'' translated 

tr' translations 

TR Textus Receptus of the NT. See 

art. Text of the NT 

trans transitive 

Treg. TregeUes 

TS Theologische Studien und Kritiken 

TSBA Transactions of the Society of Biblical 


TT Theologisch Tijdschrift 

U Untersuchungen 

ut supra as above 

V. versus 

V Codex Venetus 

ver verse 

vs verses 

VS, VSS version, versions 

Vulg Vulgate (Jerome's Latin Bible, 390- 

405 AD) 

v.v. vice versa 

W. West 

WAE Wilkinson, Ancient Egyptians 

WAI Western Asiatic Inscriptions 

WCH WeUhausen, The Composition of the 


WOA Wright, Grammar of the Arabic Lan- 


WH Westoott and Hort, The New Testa- 

ment in Greek 

WZ{KM) Wiener Zeitschrift fiir die Kunde des 


Z Zeitschrift 

ZA Zeitschrift fiir Assyriologie und ver- 

wandte Gebiete 

Zahn NT Zahn, Introduction to the New Tes- 


ZATW Zeitschrift fiir alttestamentliche Wis- 


ZDMG Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgen- 

Idndischen Gesellschaft 

ZDPV Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palastina- 


ZK Zeitschrift fiir Keilschriftforschung 

ZKW Zeitschrift fiir kirchliche Wissenschaft 

ZNTW Zeitschrift fiir neutestamentlicKe Wis- 


ZWT Zeitschrift fiir wissenschaftliche Theo- 








2 Kings 

I Cant 








1 Chronicles 

Song of 







2 Chronicles 











































1 Samuel 








2 Samuel 







1 Kings 



1 Esdras 


Wisdom of Solo- 

Ep Jer Epistle of 


Bel and 


2 Esdras 






Sir, or 

Sirach, or Ec- 


Song of 


Pr Man Prayer of IV 





Three ] 



Ad Est Additions to Es- 


1 Mace 1 Maccabees 

ther, or Rest 






2 Maoc 2 Maccabees 

of Esther 




2 Cor 

2 Corinthians 

1 Tim 

1 Timothy 

2 Pet 

2 Peter 





2 Tim 

2 Timothy 

1 Jn 

1 John 







2 Jn 

2 John 







3 Jn 

3 John 









1 Thess 1 ThessalonianKS 






1 Corinthians 

2 Thess 2 Thessalonians 

1 Pet 

1 Peter 



Apoc Bar Apocalypse of Baruch, Syriac (2 

Baruch in Charles) 
Apoc Bar Apocalypse of Baruch, Greek (3 

(Gr) Baruch in Charles) 

Asc Isa Ascension of Isaiah 

Asm M Assumption of Moses 

En Enoch, Ethiopic Book of (1 Enoch in 

Charles, Apoc and Pseudep) 

En (Slav) 

Jub or Bk 

Sib Or 

Enoch, Slavonic Book of (Book of 
the Secrets of Enoch, 2 Enoch in 

Jubilees, Book of 

Psalms of Solomon 

SibyUine Oracles 

Testament (s) of the Twelve Patriarchs 

See also arts. Apocalyptic Literature; Apocrypha. 

Note. — In the references to the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, no uniform attempt at completeness has 
been made. 



as in fate 



" far 



" fore 



" fat 



" fall 



" senate 



" church 



" verdure 



" me 



" event 



" met 



" ever 






" ice 



" pin 



" man 

n {ng 



" single 



" canon (kan'yun) 


as in old 



" orb 


" not 



" obey 






" noon 



" book 



" sound 



" ship 



" thing 



" this 



" culture 



" use 



" urn 



" but 



" ■unite 



" yet 




!!< ' (soundless) 'aleph 

S b bUh 

2 bh ( = v) 

3 g glmel 
Z\ gh (aspirated g) 

'^ d ddleth 

1 dh ( = th in the) 

I i h he 

"1 w (or v) waw{vav) 

7 z zayin 

T, h (guttural h) hetk 

13 t (intense t) iUh 

^ y yodh 

3 VT k kaph 

5 1 kh( = Ger. ch) 

J 1 lamedh 

52 D m mem 

'i '\ n nun 

C ? ^amekh 

y ' (a peculiar guttural) 'ayin 

S p pe 

5 q ph ( = f) 

^ Y 5 (almost ts) fod/je 

p If (intense k) J;6pA 

"I r resh 

123 s siri 

"iC sh s?ji7i 

ri t tdio 

t\ th (as in thing) 



" • - -.■ ■ T •.. : v; -: t: - (fu 

eiou aeiou "SaO" 

Note. — In particular cases, where a distinction should be made between a naturally long and 
a tone-long vowel, the signs a and - are used, respectively. In other cases the macron (-) is used 
to indicate "fuU" writing (i.e. with '] or '') rather than the actual quantity, of which such writing 
is ordinarily a sign. In some instances i represents "'t-, whether the ^ is consonantal or vocal in 
origin. Where sh^wd' (:) is not sounded it is not represented. Where the vowel is not marked, it 
is understood to be short. 

To represent the definite article ha- (or ha-) is used without indicating the doubling of the 
following consonant where this occurs. In other instances where it is necessary to separate a prefix 
from a stem a hyphen is employed. See also art. Alphabet. 


General rule. — ^Usage in the pronunciation of Hebrew names in English has developed after the 
analogy of Greek and Latin proper names, without any regard for the pronunciation of the Hebrew 
originals, either as represented in the Masoretic Text or as theoretically reconstructed. 

Spelling. — The spelling of these names, especially of the best known, deviates widely from any 
system of uniform transliteration that can be devised. Its evolution must be traced through the 
attrition of the Greek and Latin endings in the Vulgate forms, based in turn on the Septuagint 
versions. Thus "Solomon" and "Moses" have retained Greek endings that have no counterpart 
in the Hebrew shHomoh and mosheh; "Gomorrah" and "Gaza" have an initial vowel that represents 
the closest approximation that the Greek alphabet furnished for the pecuUar guttural y , elsewhere 
represented by a rough breathing or h (as in "Hebrew," "Hai"). The second r in "Gomorrah" is 
likewise due to the Greek spelling pp and not to the Hebrew "1 . The loss of an h in Aaron i'ah&ron) 
and of h in Isaac (yighak) must be explained in the same way. The first vowel in each of the words 
"Solomon," "Samuel," "Sodom," "Gomorrah," "Pharisee," "Debir," and similar words, takes the 
place of a practically soundless shHua', which had no exact equivalent in Greek. In form, then, the 
Hebrew names in the Bible are to all intents and purposes Greek. 

Accentuation. — The accentuation, however, is based on the Latin scheme, never on the Hebrew 
or Greek. That is to say: the last syllable is never accented; the second last is, if long, or if the 
word has only two syllables; the third from the end is accented in all other cases. Thus in each of the 
following names the accent differs from that of the Hebrew. Deb'o-rah (d'bhorah') ; Ab'i-dan or 
A-bi'dan {'dbhldhan') ; Dan'iel {dani'el') ; Sol'o-mon {shHomoh') ; Sod'om {s'dhom) ; Sam'u-el (sh^mu'el') ; 
Ke'naz (k^naz); A-bed'ne-go {'ahhedh-n^gho'); Che'mosh (km.osh); De'bir (d^bhlr). It will be 
noticed that in many of these words the syllable accented in English is not a syllable at all in Hebrew, 
but a part of a syllable in which there is no vowel but a mere breath. 


Vowels. — In determining the length of a vowel, etymology must be ignored and position in a 
word considered. Thus, in general, a vowel that closes a syllable is long, whereas one followed by 
a consonant in the same syllable is short. English models seem to be followed in this matter and 
the concepts "long" and "short" carry with them the qualitative changes customary in EngUsh. 
Thus short o is pronounced as in "cat," and not as a merely less drawn-out a. Authorities differ on 
the pronunciation of ai in Scriptural names (e.g. "Sinai"); thus the Imperial Dictionary prefers a, 
Webster and others I. vfinal is always long (as in Cozbi, Cushi, MalachI, and Zimri). 

Consonants. — Each of the consonants, excepting c, s, and t, has but a single sound, its ordinary 
English sound, g is always hard, as in "go," excepting in the word "Bethphage," which has been 
more thoroughly Graecized than Old Testament words, th is pronounced as in "thin"; ch as k, 
excepting in the name "Rachel," where it has the sound heard in the word "church"; ph is sounded 
/. c, s, and t are governed by the English rules, e is alwaj^s hard (sounded as k) except before e, 
i, and y. Thus "Cinneroth" has the soft sound (s). s as an initial vowel of a word or syllable is 
sounded as in the word "sit." Between two vowels or at the end of a word after e, I, to, n, or r it is 
pronounced as z (e.g. "Moses" [pronounced "mozez"], "Solonion," "Israel" [s soft, but oftenest 
given as z, "Isaac" [s as z]). The tendency to pronounce si and ti in obscure positions as sh is recog- 
nized bjr some, but this combination is not common in Biblical names. The pronunciation of t before 
th, as in "Matthew," is by some authorities disposed of by assimilating the t to the th. 

Conclusion.— Though. Hebrew scholars have recently displayed a tendency to permit the pro- 
nunciation of the Hebrew according to the Masora to influence that of Bible names in English by 
giving preference to forms that Show the greatest resemblance to the Hebrew (as in the name "Beza- 
leel," Hebrew b^gal'el, pronounced in English "bl-zal'g-el" or "bez'a-lel," former preferred), we must 
bear in mind that though these names are derived from the Hebrew they are spelled as if derived from 
Latin or Greek, accented as if Latin, and pronounced so far as separate letters are concerned as if 
native English words. 





















h fXLKphv 






<3 (xiya 


Eng. Pronunciatioi 














a' la 










■mob; rmi 


nob; nu 


kse; zl 
















khe (kh = Gerch) 





Phonetic Value 
a in "far," "man" 

gin "go" 

^ in "set" 
dz in "adze" 

a (German) or e in "prey" 
th in "thin" 
i in "pique," "pin" 


6 in "obey" 



s in "see" 

t in "ten" 

u (French and Welsh) or German ii 


ch (German and Welsh) 


in "so" 

a, 1, and w are sometimes long, sometimes short. 

The diphthongs are : 

ai as in "aisle" 

ei as in "eight" 

01 as in "toil" 

0.V as ou in "out" 
eu and -qv as e or ij+u, 

ou as in "group" 

VI as in "quit" 

hence roughly speaking = «m or au (no exact equivalents in English) 


and the following so-called improper diphthongs a, ai, y, ei, <u, oi. The second vowel is called "iota 
subscript," and is not sounded in pronouncing these forms, which equal o, e, and o, respectively. 

Consonants. — The consonants are in general equal to their English equivalents, except that a 
single y, g, is always hard; ^, z, is a dz-sound as in "adze," rather than the simple z as in "zeal"; 
6, th, is always the surd aspirate as in "thin," never pronounced like the ih of " this" ; a-, s, s, is always 
a sibilant as in " so," never the z-sound as in " ease " ; Xi '^K is a strong palatal aspirate like ch of Ger- 
man "Ich," "Bnch," or the Welsh "eich," "uwc/i," etc. A special note must be made of y, g, 
preceding a palatal (k, k, y, g, x, ch), as in this case the first g is nasalized, e.g. ayyeXo's, dggelos, is pro- 
nounced "aggelos" ("an'ge-los"). It might be noted further that an initial p, r, is always aspirated. 

Transliteration. — In this Encyclopaedia it has been the practice to transhterate letter for letter: 
0. = a, /3 = b, etc; even the gamma nasal has been so transliterated instead of using an n or ^ character. 
Further, the long forms of a, i, and u have not been indicated, and a, y, a>, have been transliterated as 
a, e, 0, respectively, since the "iota subscript" was not pronounced in sounding the diphthongs (e.g. 
alpeoi, hairio, but aiTta, aitla). Only the rough and not the smooth vowels are indicated. 

Accentuation. — The Greek has three accents: (1) the acute ('), as in Oeos, theds = & rising pitch 
in the voice; (2) the grave Q), as in tov Otov, ton i/iedn = a falling pitch in the voice; (3) the circumflex 
("), as in TOV Otav, toy, theoil = a, rising and falling pitch in the voice. The grave occurs only on the 
last syllable and is merely a way of indicating that other words f oUow (in the same clause or sentence) 
a word which has an acute accent on the final syllable, e.g. to, td ("the"), but when followed by 
another word, to epyov, td ergon ("the work"). The Greek accent was originally a musical or pitch 
accent rather than a stress accent as in English, and the acute, grave, and circumflex accents were 
doubtless differentiated. In indicating the accents in this Encyclopaedia, however, the stress alone 
is considered, and all accents are so indicated, whether acute, grave, or circumflex; e.g. to tpyov trom 
is transliterated to ergon poio and not to ergon poio. 


A. — SeeALEPH; Alphabet. 

AALAR, a'a-lar. See Allar. 

AARON, Ar'un, sometimes pronomioed ar'on 
(■j'nni?, 'ahdron — LXX 'Aapiiv, Aardn, meaning 
uncertain: Gesenius suggests "mountaineer": 
Furst, "enlightened"; others give "rich," "fluent.'* 
Cheyne mentions Redslob's "ingenious conjecture" 
of ha-'dron — "the ark" — with its mythical, priestly 
significance, EB s.v.) : Probably eldest son of 
Amram (Ex 6 20), and according to the uniform 
genealogical lists (Ex 6 16-20; 1 Ch 

1. Family 6 1-3), the fourth from Levi. This 

however is not certainly fixed, since 
there are frequent omissions from the Heb lists of 
names which are not prominent in the line of de- 
scent. For the corresponding period from Levi to 
Aaron the Judah hst has six names (Ruth 4 18-20; 
1 Ch 2). Levi and his family were zealous, even 
to violence (Gen 34 25; Ex 32 26), for the national 
honor and religion, and Aaron no doubt inherited 
his full portion of this spirit. His mother's name 
was Jochebed, who was also of the Levitical family 
(Ex 6 20). Miriam, his sister, was several years 
older, since she was set to watch the novel cradle 
of the infant brother Moses, at whose birth Aaron 
was three years old (Ex 7 7). 

When Moses fled from Egypt, Aaron remained 

to share the hardships of his people, and possibly 

to render them some service; for we 

2. Becomes are told that Moses intreated of God 
Moses' his brother's cooperation in his mis- 
Assistant sion to Pharaoh and to Israel, and 

that Aaron went out to meet his 
returning brother, as the time of deliverance drew 
near (Ex 4 27). While Moses, whose great gifts 
lay along other lines, was slow of speech (Ex 4 10), 
Aaron was a ready spokesman, and became his 
brother's representative, being called his "mouth" 
(Ex 4 16) and his "prophet" (Ex 7 1). After 
their meeting in the wilderness the two brothers 
returned together to Egypt on the hazardous mis- 
sion to which Jehovah had called them (Ex 4 
27-31). At first they appealed to their own nation, 
recalling the ancient promises and declaring the 
imminent deliverance, Aaron being the spokesman. 
But the heart of the people, hopeless by reason of ' 
the hard bondage and heavy with the care of 
material things, did not incUne to them. The two 
brothers then forced the issue by appealing directly 
to Pharaoh himself, Aaron still speaking for his 
brother (Ex 6 10-13). He also performed, at 
Moses' direction, the miracles which confounded 
Pharaoh and his magicians. With Hur, he held up 
Moses' hands, in order that the 'rod of God might 
be lifted up,' during the fight with Amalek (Ex 
17 10.12). 

Aaron next comes into prominence when at 

Sinai he is one of the elders and representatives of 

his tribe to approach nearer to the 

3. An Elder Mount than the people in general 

were allowed to do, and to see the 
manifested glory of God (Ex 24 1.9.10). A few 
days later, when Moses, attended by his "minister" 
Joshua, went up into the mountain, Aaron exer- 
cised some kind of headship over the people in his 
absence. Despairing of seeing again their leader, 
who had disappeared into the mystery of commun- 
ion with the invisible God, they appealed to Aaron 
to prepare them more tangible gods, and to lead them 
back to Egypt (Ex 32). Aaron never appears as 
the strong, heroic character which his brother was; 
and here at Sinai he revealed his weaker nature, 
yielding to the demands of the people and per- 
mitting the making of the golden bullock. That 
he must however have yielded reluctantly, is evi- 
dent from the ready zeal of his tribesmen, whose 
leader he was, to stay and to avenge the apostasy 
by rushing to arms and falling mightily upon the 
idolaters at the call of Moses (Ex 32 26-28). 

In connection with the planning and erection 

of the tabernacle ("the Tent"), Aaron and his sons 

being chosen for the official priest- 

4. High hood, elaborate and symbolical vest- 
Priest ments were prepared for them (Ex 28) ; 

and after the erection and dedication 
of the tabernacle, he and his sons were formally 
inducted into the sacred office (Lev 8) . It appears 
that Aaron alone was anointed with the holy oil 
(Lev 8 12), but his sons were included with him 
in the duty of caring for sacrificial rites and things. 
They served in receiving and presenting the vari- 
ous offerings, and could enter and serve in the first 
chamber of the tabernacle; but Aaron alone, the 
high priest, the Mediator of the Old Covenant, 
could enter into the Holy of Holies, and that only 
once a year, on the great Day of Atonement 
(Lev 16 12-14). 

After the departure of Israel from Sinai, Aaron 
joined his sister Miriam in a protest against the 

authority of Moses (Nu 12), which 

5. Rebels they asserted to be self-assumed. 
Against For this rebellion Miriam was smit- 
Moses ten with leprosy, but was made whole 

again, when, at the pleading of Aaron, 
Moses interceded with God for her. The sacred 
office of Aaron, requiring physical, moral and cere- 
monial cleanness of the strictest order, seems to 
have made him immune from this form of punish- 
ment. Somewhat later (Nu 16) he himself, along 
with Moses, became the object of a revolt of his 
own tribe in conspiracy with leaders of Dan and 
Reuben. This rebellion was subdued and the 
authority of Moses and Aaron vindicated by the 



miraculous overthrow of the rebels. As they were 
being destroyed by the plague, Aaron, at Moses' 
command, rushed into their midst with the lighted 
censer, and the destruction was stayed. The Divine 
will in choosing Aaron and his family to the 
priesthood was then fully attested by the mirac- 
ulous budding of his rod, when, together with 
rods representing the other tribes, it was placed 
and left overnight in the sanctuary (Nu 17). See 
Aaron's Rod. 

After this event Aaron does not come prominently 
into view until the time of his death, near the close 
of the Wilderness period. Because of the impa- 
tience, or unbelief, of Moses and Aaron at Meri- 
bah (Nu 20 12), the two brothers are prohibited 
from entering Canaan; and shortly after the last 
camp at Kadesh was broken, as the people jour- 
neyed eastward to the plains of Moab, Aaron died 
on Mount Hor. In three passages this event is 
recorded: the more detailed account in Nu 20, a 
second incidental record in the list of stations of 
the wanderings in the wilderness (Nu 33 38.39), 
and a third casual reference (Dt 10 6) in an address 
of Moses. These are not in the least contradictory 
or inharmonious. The dramatic scene is fully pre? 
sented in Nu'20: Moses, Aaron and Eleazar go up 
to Mount Hor in the people's sight; Aaron is 
divested of his robes of ofBce, which are formally 
put upon his eldest living son; Aaron 

6. Further dies before the Lord in the Mount 
History at the age of 123, and is given burial 

by his two mourning relatives, who 
then return to the camp without the first and great 
high priest; when the people understand that he is 
no more, they show both grief and love by thirty 
days of mourning. The passage in Nu 33 records 
the event of his death just after the list of stations 
in the general vicinity of Mount Hor; while Moses 
in Dt 10 states from which of these stations, viz. 
Moserah, that remarkable funeral procession made 
its way to Mount Hor. In the records we find, 
not contradiction and perplexity, but simplicity and 
unity. It is not within the view of this article to 
present modern displacements and rearrangements 
of the Aaronic history; it is concerned with the 
records as they are, and as they contain the faith 
of the OT writers in the origin in Aaron of their 
priestly order. 

Aaron married Elisheba, daughter of Amminadab, 

and sister of Nahshon, prince of the tribe of Judah, 

who bore him four sons : Nadab, Abihu, 

7. Priestly Eleazar and Ithamar. The sacrilegious 
Succession act and consequent judicial death 

of Nadab and Abihu are recorded in 
Lev 10. Eleazar and Ithamar were more pious and 
reverent; and from them descended the long line 
of priests to whom was committed the ceremonial 
law of Israel, the succession changing from one 
branch to the other with certain crises in the 
nation. At his death Aaron was succeeded by his 
oldest living son, Eleazar (Nu 20 28; Dt 10 6). 

Edward Mack 
AARONITES, ar'on-its (liinxb, l»-'ahdron, lit. 
"belonging to Aaron") : A word used in AV, but 
not in the revised versions, to translate the proper 
name Aaron in two instances where it denotes a 
family and not merely a person (1 Ch 12 27; 27 
17). It is equivalent to the phrases "sons of 
Aaron," "house of Aaron," frequently used in the 
OT. According to the books of Josh and Ch the 
"sons'of Aaron" were distinguished from the other 
Levites from the time of Joshua (e.g. Josh 21 
4.10.13; ICh 6 54). 

AARON'S ROD (Nu 17 and He 9 4) : Immedi- 
ately after the incidents connected with the rebellion 
of Korah, Dathan and Abiram against the leader- 

ship of Moses and the priestly primacy of Aaron 
(Nu 16), it became necessary to indicate and 
emphasize the Divine appointment of Aaron. 
Therefore, at the command of Jehovah, Moses 
directs that twelve almond rods, one for each tribe 
with the prince's name engraved thereon, be placed 
within the Tent of the .Testimony. When Moses 
entered the tent theiollowing day, he found that 
Aaron's rod had budded, blossomed and borne 
fruit, "the three stages of vegetable life being thus 
simultaneously visible." When the miraculous 
sign was seen by the people, they accepted it as 
final; nor was there ever again any question of 
Aaron's priestly right. The rod was kept "before 
the testimony", in the sanctuary ever after as a 
token of the Divine will (17 10). The writer of 
He, probably following a later Jewish tradition, 
mentions the rod as kept in the Holy of Holies 
within the ark (He 9 4; of 1 K 8 9). See Priest, 
III. Edward Mack 

AB (DS! or 35? , 'dbh or 'abh, the Heb and Aram, 
word for "father") : It is a very common word in 
the OT; this art. notes only certain uses of it. It 
is used both in the singular and in the plural to 
denote a grandfather or more remote ancestors 
(e.g. Jer 36 16.15). The father of a people or 
tribe is its founder, not, as is frequently assumed, 
its progenitor. In this sense Abraham is father 
to the Israelites (see, for example, Gen 17 11-14.27), 
Isaac and Jacob and the heads of families being 
fathers in the same modified sense. The cases 
of Ishmael, Moab, etc, are similar. The tradi- 
tional originator of a craft is the father of those 
who practise the craft (e.g. Gen 4 20.21.22). 
Sennacherib uses the term "my fathers" of his 
predecessors on the throne of Assyria, though these 
were not his ancestors (2 K 19 12) . The term is 
used to express worth and affection irrespective 
of bl6od relation (e.g. 2 K 13 14). A ruler or 
leader is spoken of as a father. God is father. A 
frequent use of the word is that in the composition 
of proper names, e.g. Abinadab, "my father is 
noble." See Abi. 

The Aram, word in its definite form is used three 
times in the NT (Mk 14 36; Rom 8 15; Gal 
4 6), the phrase being in each case "Abba, Father," 
addressed to God . In this phrase the word ' 'Father' ' 
is added, apparently, not as a mere tr, nor to indi- 
cate that Abba is thought of as a proper name of 
Deity, but as a term of pleading and of endear- 
ment. See also Abba. Willis J. Bebchbr 

AB (ax, 'abh): The name of the fifth month 
in the Heb calendar, the month beginning in our 
July. The name does not appear in the Bible, but 
Jos gives it to the month in which Aaron died 
{Ant, IV,iv, 6; cf Nu 33 38). 

ABACUC, ab'a-kuk (Lat Abacuc) : The form given 
the name of the prophet Habakkuk in 2 Esd 1 40. 

ABADDON, a-bad'on (I'l'iaX, 'dbhaddon, "ruin," 
"perdition,'^ "destruction") : Though "destruction" 
is commonly used in translating 'ahhaddon, the stem 
idea is intransitive rather than passive — the idea of 
perishing, going to ruin, being in a ruined state, 
rather than that of being ruined, being destroyed. 

The word occurs six times in the OT, always 
as a place name in the sense in which Sheol is a 
place name. It denotes, in certain aspects, the 
world of the dead as constructed in the Heb imagi- 
nation. It is a common mistake to understand 
such expressions in a too mechanical way. Like 
ourselves, the men of the earlier ages had to use 
picture language when they spoke of the conditions 
that existed after death, however their picturing 



of the matter may have differed from ours. In 
three instances Abaddon is parallel with Sheol 
(Job 26 6; Prov 15 11; 27 20). In one instance 
it is parallel with death, in one with the grave and 
in the remaining instance the parallel phrase is 
"root out all mine increase" (Job 28 22; Ps 88 11; 
Job 31 12). In this last passage the place idea 
comes nearer to vanishing in an abstract concep- 
tion than in the other passages. 

Abaddon belongs to the realm of the mysterious. 
Only God understands it (Job 26 6; Prov 15 11). 
It is the world of the dead in its utterly dismal, 
destructive, dreadful aspect, not in those more 
cheerful aspects in which activities are conceived 
of as in progress there. In Abaddon there are no 
declarations of God's lovingkindness (Ps 88 11). 

In a slight degree the OT presentations person- 
alize Abaddon. It is a synonym for insatiableness 
(Prov 27 20). It has possibilities of information 
mediate between those of "all living" and those 
of God (Job 28 22). 

In the NT the word occurs once (Rev 9 11), 
the personalization becoming sharp. Abaddon 
is here not the world of the dead, but the angel^ 
who reigns over it. The Gr equivalent of his 
name is given as ApoUyon. Under this name 
Bunyan presents him in the Pilgrim's Progress, 
and Christendom has doubtless been more in- 
terested in this presentation of the matter than 
in any other. 

In some treatments Abaddon is connected with 
the evil spirit Asmodeus of Tobit (e.g. 3 8), and 
with the destroyer mentioned in Wisd (18 25; cf 22) , 
and through these with a large body of rabbinical 
folklore; but these efforts are simply groundless. 
See Apollyon. Willis J. Beechbb 

ABADIAS, ab-a-di'as (Gr 'APoSCas) : Mentioned 
in 1 Esd 8 35 as the son of Jezelus, of the sons of 
Joab, returned with Ezra from the captivity; and 
in Ezr 8 9 called "Obadiah the son of Jehiel." 

ABAGARUS, a-bag'a-rus. See Abgarus. 

ABAGTHA, a-bag'tha (Xn^SS, 'SbhaghHha', per- 
haps meaning "fortunate one") : One of the seven 
eunuchs, or "chamberlains," of Xerxes mentioned 
in Est 1 10. The name is Persian, and is one of 
the many Pers marks in the Book of Est. 

ABANAH, abVna, a-ba'na (HpSS, 'dbhanah 
[Knhlbh, LXX, Vulg]), or AMANA (npiSK, 'Umanah 
[K're, Pesh, Tg]; AV Abana [ARVm Amana], 
RV ABANAH [RVm Amanah]): Mentioned in 
2 K 6 12, along with the Pharpar (q.v.), as one 
of the principal rivers of Damascus. The reading 
Amana (meaning possibly the "constant," or 
perennial stream) is on the whole preferable. Both 
forms of the name may have been in use, as the 
interchange of an aspirated b (bh = v) and m is 
not without parallel (cf Evil-merodach = Amil- 
marduk). . „, , 

The A. is identified with the Chrysorrhoas 
("golden stream") of the Greeks, the modern Nahr 
Barada (the "cold"), which rises in the Anti- 
Lebanon, one of its sources, the Ain Barada, being 
near the village of Zebedani, and flows in a southerly 
and then southeasterly direction toward Damascus. 
A few miles southeast of Suh Wady Barada (the 
ancient Abila; see Abilene) the volume of the 
stream is more than doubled by a torrent of clear, 
cold water from the beautifully situated spring 
'■Ain Fijeh (Gr T-qy^, pegt, "fountain"), after which 
it flows through a picturesque gorge till it reaches 
Damascus, whose many fountains and gardens it 
supplies liberally with water. In the neighbor- 
hood of Damascus a number of streams branch off 

from the parent river, and spread out like an open- 
ing fan on the surrounding plain. The Barada, 
along with the streams which it feeds, loses itself 
in the marshes of the Meadow Lakes about 18 miles 
E. of the city. 

The water of the Barada, though not perfectly 
wholesome in the city itself, is for the most part 
clear and cool; its course is picturesque, and its 
value to Damascus, as the source alike of fertility 
and of charm, is inestimable. C. H. Thomson 

ABARIM, ab'a-rim, a-ba'rim (D^^D?) 'dbharim) : 
The stem idea is that of going across a space or a 
dividing line, or for example a river. It is the same 
stem that appears in the familiar phrase "beyond 
Jordan," used to denote the region E. of the Jor- 
dan, and Hellenized in the name Peraea. This 
fact affords the most natural explanation of the 
phrases 'the mountains of the Abarim' (Nu 33 
47.48); 'this mountain-country of the Abarim' 
(Nu 27 12; Dt 32 49); lye-abarim, which means 
"Heaps of the Abarim," or "Mounds of the Abarim" 
(Nu 21 11; 33 44). In Nu 33 45 this station is 
called simply lyim, "Mounds." It is to be dis- 
tinguished from the place of the same name in 
southern Judah (Josh 15 29). The name Abarim, 
without the article, occurs in Jer (22 20 RV, 
where AV translates "the passages"), where it 
seems to be the name of a region, on the same foot- 
ing with the names Lebanon and Bashan, doubtless 
the region referred to in Nu and Dt. There is no 
reason for changing the vowels in Ezk 39 11, in 
order to make that another occurrence of the same 

When the people of Abraham lived in Canaan, 
before they went to Egypt to sojourn, they spoke 
of the region east of the Jordan as "beyond Jor- 
dan." Looking across the Jordan and the Dead 
Sea they designated the mountain country they 
saw there as "the Beyond mountains." They con- 
tinued to use these geographical terms when they 
came out of Egypt. We have no means of knowing 
to how extensive a region they applied the name. 
The passages speak of the mountain country of 
Abarim where Moses died, including Nebo, as 
situated back from the river Jordan in its lowest 
reaches; and of the Mounds of the Abarim as 
farther to the southeast, so that the Israelites 
pEissed them when making their detour around the 
agricultural parts of Edom, before they crossed the 
Arnon. Whether the name Abarim should be 
applied to the parts of the eastern hill country 
farther to the north is a question on which we lack 
evidence. Willis J. Beecher 

ABASE, a-bas': The English rendition of bSffi, 
shaphel (Job 40 11; Ezk 21 26), and of its deriva- 
tive bSUJ sh^phal (Dnl 4 37) = "bring down," 
"debase,''' " humble" ; of njy, 'anah (Isa 31 4) = 
"abase self," "afflict," "chasten self," "deal 
harshly with," etc; and of Taireivdu, tapeihdo = 
"to depress"; fig. "to humihate" (in condition or 
heart): "abase," "bring low," "humble self" 
(Phil 4 12). The word is always employed to 
indicate what should be done to or by him who 
nurtures a spirit and exhibits a demeanor contrary 
to the laudable humility which is a natural fruit of 
religion. Such a person is warned that the most 
extravagant audacity will not daunt Jehovah nor 
abate His vengeance (Isa 31 4), and good men are 
exhorted to employ their powers to bring him low 
(Job 40 11; Ezk 21 26). If men are not able 
to curb the arrogant, God is (Dnl 4 37) ; and He 
has so constituted the world, that sinful arrogance 
must fall (Mt 23 12 AV; Lk 14 11 AV; 18 14 
jVV). Frank E. Hiksch 



ABATE, a-bat': Used six times in OT for five 
different Heb words, signifying "to diminish," 
"reduce," "assuage"; of the Flood (Gen 8 8); of 
strength (Dt 34 7); of pecuniary value (Lev 27 18); 
of wrath (Jgs 8 3) ; of fire (Nu 11 2). 

ABBA, ab'a (dppa, S3X , 'abba', Hebraio-Chald, 
"Father"): In Jewish and old-Christian prayers, 
a name by which God was addressed, then in 
oriental churches a title of bishops and patriarchs. 
So Jesus addresses God in prayer (Mt 11 25.26; 
26 39.42; Lk 10 21; 22 42; 23 34; Jn 11 41; 12 
27; 17 24.25). In Mk 14 36; Rom 8 15, and Gal 
4 6 A TTaTiJp, ho pater, is appended even in direct 
address, in an emphatic sense. Servants were not 
permitted to use the appellation in addressing the 
head of the house. See Delitzsch on Rom 8 15; 
cf G. Dalman, Gram, des jud.-paldst. Aramaisch, 
etc, §40, c. 3. J. E. Harry 

ABDA, ab'da (5<'13?, ^abhM', perhaps, by abbre- 
viation, "servant of Jeh") : (1) The father of 
Adoniram, King Solomon's superintendent of forced 
labor (1 K 4 6). (2) A Levite mentioned in the 
statistical note in Neh (11 17). This "Abda the 
son of Shammua" is in the partly duplicate 
passage in 1 Ch (9 16) called "Obadiah the son of 

ABDEEL, ab'ds-el (bs-l^?, 'abW'el, "servant 
of God") : The father of Shelemiah, one of the offi- 
cers whom King Jehoiakim commanded to arrest 
Baruch, the scribe, and Jeremiah the prophet 
(Jer 36 26). 

ABDI, ab'di Cl^?, 'abhdi, probably by abbre- 
viation "servant of Jeh") : A Levite, father of 
Kishi and grandfather of King David's singer 
Ethan (1 Ch 6 44; cf 15 17). This makes Abdi 
a contemporary of Saul the king. (2) A Levite, 
father of the Kish who was in service at the begin- 
ning of the reign of Hezekiah (2 Ch 29 12). Some 
mistakenly identify this Abdi with the former. 
(3) A man who in Ezra's time had married a 
foreign wife (Ezr 10 26) . Not a Levite, but "of 
the sons of Elam." 

ABDIAS, ab-dl'as (2 Esd 1 39 = Obadiah): One 
of the Minor Prophets. Mentioned with Abraham, 
Isaac, Jacob and the Minor Prophets who shall be 
given as leaders to the "nation from the east" which 
is to overthrow Israel (cf Obadiah) . 

ABDIEL, ab'di-el (bxi^ny, 'abhdi'el, "servant 
of God") : A Gadite who lived in Gilead or in Ba- 
shan, and whose name was reckoned in genealogies 
of the time of Jotham, king of Judah, or of Jero- 
boam II, king of Israel (1 Ch 5 15-17). 

ABDON, ab'don (]T\y?, 'abhdon, perhaps 
"service"; ' A^Siiv, Abdon): 

(1) A judge of Israel for eight years (Jgs 12 13- 
15). The account says that he was the son of 
Hillel the Pirathonite, and that he was buried in 
Pirathon in the land of Ephraim. No mention is 
made of great public services rendered by him, but 
it is said that he had seventy well-mounted sons 
and grandsons. So far as we can judge, he was 
placed in office as a wealthy elderly man, and per- 
formed the routine duties acceptably. Very 
likely his two next predecessors Ibzan and Elon 
were men of the same type. 

An effort has been made to identify Abdon with 
the Bedan mentioned in 1 S 12 11, but the iden- 
tification is precarious. 

A certain importance attaches to Abdon from 

the fact that he is the last judge mentioned in the 
continuous account (Jgs 2 6 — 13 1) in the Book of 
Jgs. After the account of him follows the state- 
ment that Israel was delivered into the hands of the 
Philistines forty years, and with that statement 
the continuous account closes and the series of per- 
sonal stories begins — the stories of Samson, ■ of 
Micah and his Levite, of the Benjamite civil war, 
followed in our English Bibles by the stories of 
Ruth and of the childhood of Samuel. With the 
close of this last story (1 S 4 18) the narrative of 
public affairs is resumed, at a point when Israel is 
making a desperate effort, at the close of the forty 
years of Eh, to throw off the Philistine yoke. A 
large part of one's views of the history of the 
period of the Judges will depend on the way in 
which he combines these events. My own view 
is that the forty years of Jgs 13 1 and of 1 S 4 18 
are the same; that at the death of Abdon the 
Philistines asserted themselves as overlords of 
Israel; that it was a part of their policy to suppress 
nationality in Israel; that they abolished the office 
of judge, and changed the high-priesthood to an- 
/ other family, making Eli high priest; that Eli 
was sufficiently competent so that many of the 
functions of national judge drifted into his hands. 
It should be noted that the regaining of inde- 
pendence was signalized by the reestablishment 
of the office of judge, with Samuel as incumbent 
(1 S 7 6 and context). This view takes into the 
account that the narrative concerning Samson is 
detachable, like the narratives that follow, Samson 
belonging to an earlier period. See Samson. 

(2) The son of Jeiel and his wife Maacah (1 Ch 8 
30; 9 36). Jeiel is described as the "father of 
Gibeon," perhaps the founder of the Israelitish 
community there. This Abdon is described as 
brother to Ner, the grandfather of King Saul. 

(3) One of the messengers sent by King Josiah to 
Huldah the prophetess (2 Ch 34 20) ; called Achbor 
in 2 K 22 12. 

(4) One of many men of Benjamin mentioned as 
dwelling in Jerus (1 Ch 8 23), possibly in Nehe- 
miah's time, though the date is not clear. 

Willis J. Bbecher 
ABDON, ab'don 0112?, 'abhdon, perhaps "serv- 
ice") : One of the four Levitical cities in the tribe 
of Asher (Josh 21 30; 1 Ch 6 74). Probably the 
same with Ebron (in AV "Hebron") in Josh 19 28, 
where some copies have the reading Abdon. Now 
called Abdeh, a few miles from the Mediterranean 
and about fifteen miles south of Tyre. 

ABED-WEGO, a-bed'nS-go (Heb and Aram. 
13: -ny, 'dbhedh rfgho; Dnl 3 29, Sijp 13?, 'Sbhedh 
n'gho') : According to many, the nego is an inten- 
tional corruption of Nebo, the name of a Bab god, 
arising from the desire of the Heb scribes to avoid 
the giving of a heathen name to a hero of their 
faith. The name, according to this view, would 
mean "servant of Nebo." Inasmuch as 'dbhedh 
is a tr of the Bab 'arad, it seems more probable 
that nego also must be a tr of some Bab word. 
The goddess Ishtar is by the Babylonians called 
"the morning star" and "the perfect light" (nigittu 
gilmallu). The morning star is called by the 
Aranmeans nogah, "the shining one," a word derived 
from the root negah, the equivalent of the Bab 
nagu, "to shine." Abed-nego, according to this 
interpretation, would be the tr of Arad-Ishtar, a 
not uncommon name among the Assyrians and 
Babylonians. Canon Johns gives this as ihe name 
of more than thirty Assyrians, who are mentioned 
on the tablets cited by him in Vol. Ill of his great 
work entitled Assyrian Deeds and Documents. 
It means "servant of Ishtar." 



Abed-nego was one of the three companions of 
Daniel, and was the name imposed upon the Hebrew 
Azariah by Nebuchadnezzar (Dnl 1 7). Having 
refused, along with his friends, to eat the provisions 
of the king's table, he was fed and flourished upon 
pulse and water. Having successfully passed his 
examinations and escaped the death with which 
the wise men of Babylon were threatened, he was 
appointed at the request of Daniel along with his 
companions over the affairs of the province of 
Babylon (Dnl 2). Having refused to bow down 
to the image which Nebuchadnezzar had set up, 
he was cast into the burning fiery furnace, and 
after his triumphant delivery he was caused by the 
king to prosper in the province of Babylon (Dnl 3). 
The three friends are referred to by name in 1 Mace 
2 59, and by implication in He 11 33.34. 

R. Dick Wilson 

ABEL, aljel (55n, hebhel; "ApeX, Abel; WH 
Hdbel; etymology uncertain. Some tr "a breath," 
"vapor," "transitoriness," which are suggestive 
of his brief existence and tragic end; others take 
it to be a variant of Jabal, yabhal, "shepherd" or 
"herdman," Gen 4 20. Cf Assyr ablu and Bab 
abil, "son"): The second son of Adam and Eve. 
The absence of the vb. harah (Gen 4 2; cf ver 1) 
has been taken to imply, perhaps truly, that Cain 
and Abel were twins. 

"Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a 

tiller of the ground," thus representing the two 

fundamental pursuits of civilized life, 

1. A the two earliest subdivisions of the 
Shepherd human race. On the Heb tradition 

of the superiority of the pastoral over 
agricultural and city life, see Expos T, V, 351 ff. 
The narrative may possibly bear witness to the 
primitive idea that pastoral life was more pleasing 
to Jeh than husbandry. 

"In process of time," the two brothers came in a 

solemn manner to sacrifice unto Jeh, in order to 

express their gratitude to Him whose 

2. A tenants they were in the land (vs 3.4. 
Worshipper See Sacrifice). How Jeh signified 

His acceptance of the one offering and 
rejection of the other, we are not told. That it 
was due to the difference in the material of the sac- 
rifice or in their manner of offering was probably 
the belief among the early Israelites, who regarded 
animal offerings as superior to cereal offerings. 
Both kinds, however, were fully in accord with Heb 
law and custom. It has been suggested that the 
LXX rendering of 4 7 makes Cain's offence a 
ritual one, the offering not being "correctly" made 
or rightly divided, and hence rejected as irregular. 
"If thou makest a proper offering, but dost not cut 
in pieces rightly, art thou not in fault? Be still!" 
The LXX evidently took the rebuke to turn upon 
Cain's neglect to prepare his offering according to 
strict ceremonial requirements. SiiXTjs, diSles (LXX 
in loc), however, implies nfi: (iiriD), nathah 
(nattah), and would only apply to animal sacrifices. 
Cf Ex 29 17; Lev 8 20; Jgs 19 29; 1 K 18 23; 
and see Couch. 

The true reason for the Divine preference is 
doubtless to be found in the disposition of the 

brothers (see Cain). Well-doing con- 

3. A sisted not in the outward offering 
Righteous (4 7) but in the right state of mind and 
Man feeling. The acceptability depends 

on the inner motives and moral char- 
acters of the offerers. "By faith Abel offered unto 
God a more excellent [abundant, pleiona] sacrifice 
than Cain" (He 11 4). The "more abundant 
sacrifice," Westcott thinks, "suggests the deeper 
gratitude of Abel, and shows a fuller sense of the 
claims of God" to the best. Cain's "works [the 

collective expression of his inner life] were evil, 
and his brother's righteous" (1 Jn 3 12). "It 
would be an outrage if the gods looked to gifts 
and sacrifices and not to the soul" {Alcibiades 
II.149E.150A). Cain's heart was no longer pure; 
it had a criminal propensity, springing from envy 
and jealousy, which rendered both his offering 
and person unacceptable. His evil works and 
hatred of his brother culminated in the act of mur- 
der, specifically evoked by the opposite character of 
Abel's works and the acceptance of his offering. 
The evil man cannot endure the sight of goodness 
in another. 

Abel ranks as the first martyr (Mt 23 35), 
whose blood cried for vengeance (Gen 4 10; cf 
Rev 6 9.10) and brought despair 
4. A (Gen 4 13), whereas that of Jesus 

Martyr appeals to God for forgiveness and 

speaks peace (He 12 24) and is pre- 
ferred before Abel's. 

The first two brothers in history stand as the 
types and representatives of the two main and 
J. • ~ enduring divisions of mankind, and 

0. A ype jjg^j, ^i^jjggg ^;q the absolute antithesis 
and eternal enmity between good and evil. 

M. O. Evans 

ABEL, a'bel (^3^5 , 'abhel, "meadow") : A word 
used in several compound names of places. It 
appears by itself as the name of a city concerned 
in the rebellion of Sheba (2 S 20 14; cf 18), 
though it is there probably an abridgment of the 
name Abel-beth-maacah. In 1 S 6 18, where the 
Heb has "the great meadow," and the Gr "the 
great stone," AV translates "the great stone of 

ABEL-BETH-MAACAH, a'bel-beth-ma'a-ka 

(n^yia rr^il bis , 'abhel bUh ma'&khah, "the 
meadow of the house of Maacah") : The name 
appears in this form in 1 K 15 20 and 2 K 15 29. 
In 2 S 20 15 (Heb) it is Abel-beth-hammaacah 
(Maacah with the article). In ver 14 of that 
chapter it appears as Beth-maacah, and in vs 14 
and 18 as Abel. 

In 2 S it is spoken of as the city, far to the north, 
where Joab besieged Sheba, the son of Bichri. In 
2 K it is mentioned, along with Ijon and other 
places, as a city in Naphtah captured by Tiglath- 
pileser, king of Assyria. The capture appears 
also in the records of Tiglath-pileser. In 1 K it is 
mentioned with Ijon and Dan and "all the land of 
Naphtah" as being smitten by Benhadad of Da- 
mascus in the time of Baasha. 

In the account in Ch parallel to this last (2 Ch 
16 4) the cities mentioned are Ijon, Dan, Abel- 
maim. Abel-maim is either another name for 
Abel-beth-maacah, or the name of another place 
in the same vicinity. , i , . 

The prevaiUng identification of Abel-beth-maacah 
is with Abil, a few miles W. of Dan, on a height 
overlooking the Jordan near its sources. The 
adjacent region is rich agriculturally, and the 
scenery and the water supply are especially fine. 
Abel-maim, "meadow of water," is not an inapt 
designation for it. Wilms J. Beecheb 

ABEL-CHERAMIM, a'bel-ker'a-mim (bgS 
Wl?"}^ , 'abhel k'ramlm, "meadow of vineyards'') : 
A city mentioned in the RV in Jgs 11 33, along with 
Aroer, Minnith, and "twenty cities," in summa- 
rizing Jephthah's campaign against the Ammonites. 
AV translates "the plain of the vineyards.' The 
site has not been identified, though Eusebius and 
Jerome speak of it as in their time a village about 
seven Roman miles from the Ammonite city of 




ABEL-MAIM, a'bel-ma'im (D'^'a bSS, 'abhel 
mayim, "meadow of water"). See Abel-beth- 


ABEL-MEHOLAH, a'bel-ms-ho'lah (bnX 
npinp , 'ahhel m^holdh, "meadow of dancing") : 
The residence of Elisha the prophet (1 K 19 16). 
When Gideon and his 300 broke their pitchers in 
the camp of Midian, the Midianites in their first 
panic fled down the valley of Jezreel and the 
Jordan "toward Zererah" (Jgs 7 22). Zererah 
(Zeredah) is Zarethan (2 Ch 4 17; cf 1 K 7 46), 
separated from Sucooth by the clay ground where 
Solomon made castings for the temple. The wing 
of the Midianites whom Gideon pursued crossed 
the Jordan at Sucooth (Jgs 8 4 ff). This would 
indicate that Abel-meholah was thought of as a 
tract of country with a "border," W. of the Jordan, 
some miles S. of Beth-shean, in the territory either 
of Issachar or West Manasseh. 

Abel-meholah is also mentioned in connection 
with the jurisdiction of Baana, one of Solomon's 
twelve commissary officers (1 K 4 12) as below 
Jezreel, with Beth-shean and Zarethan in the same 

Jerome and Eusebius speak of Abel-meholah as 
a tract of country and a town in the Jordan valley, 
about ten Rom miles S. of Beth-shean. At just 
that point the name seems to be perpetuated in 
that of the Wady Mahh, and Abel-meholah is 
commonly located near where that Wady, or the 
neighboring Wady Helweh, comes down into the 
Jordan valley. 

Presumably Adriel the Meholathite (1 S 18 19; 
2 S 21 8) was a resident of Abel-meholah. 

Willis J. Beecher 

ABEL-MIZRAIM, a'bel-miz'ra-im (n'?1.213 bnX, 
'dbhel misrayim, "meadow of Egypt") : A name 
given to "the threshing floor of Atad," E. of the 
Jordan and N. of the Dead Sea, because Joseph 
and his funeral party from Egypt there held their 
mourning over Jacob (Gen 60 11). The name is 
a pun. The Canaanite residents saw the 'ebhel, 
"the mourning," and therefore that place was 
called 'abhel migrayim. 

It is remarkable that the funeral should have 
taken this circuitous route, instead of going directly 
from Egypt to Hebron. Possibly a reason may be 
found as we obtain additional details in Egyp his- 
tory. The explanations which consist in changing 
the text, or in substituting the North Arabian 
MuQri for Migrayim, are unsatisfactory. 

Willis J. Beecher 

ABEL-SHITTIM, a'bel-shit'tim (D'^ElBn IsDN, 
'abhel ha-shittim, "the meadow of the Acacias") : 
The name appears only in Nu 33 49; but the 
name Shittim is used to denote the same locality 
(Nu 25 1; Josh 2 1; 3 1; Mic 6 S). The name 
always has the art., and the best expression of it 
in English would be "the Acacias." 'The valley 
of the Acacias' (Joel 3 18 [4 18]) is, apparently, a 
different locality. 

For many weeks before crossing the Jordan, 
Israel was encamped in the roundout of the Jor- 
dan valley, N. of the Dead Sea, E. of the river. 
The notices in the Bible, supplemented by those 
in Jos and Eusebius and Jerome, indicate that the 
camping region was many miles in extent, the 
southern limit being Beth-jeshimoth, toward the 
Dead Sea, while Abel of the Acacias was the 
northern limit and the headquarters. The head- 
quarters are often spoken of as E. of the Jordan 
at Jericho (e.g. Nu 22 1; 26 3.63). During the 
stay there occurred the Balaam incident (Nu 22- 
24), and the harlotry with Moab and Midian 
(Nu 26) and the war with Midian (Nu 31), in 

both of which Phinehas distinguished himself. It 
was from the Acacias that Joshua sent out the 
spies, and that Israel afterward moved down to 
the river for the crossing. Micah aptly calls upon 
Jehovah's people to remember all that happened 
to them from the time when they reached the 
Acacias to the time when Jehovah had brought 
them safely across the river to Gilgal. 

Jos is correct in saying that Abel of the Acacias 
is the place from which the Deuteronomic law pur- 
ports to have been given. In his time the name 
survived as Abila, a not very important town 
situated there. He says that it was "sixty fur- 
longs from Abila to the Jordan," that is a little 
more than seven English miles (Ant, IV, viii, 1 
and V, i, 1; BJ, IV, vii, 6). There seems to be a 
consensus for locating the site at Kefrein, near 
where the wady of that name comes down into the 
Jordan valley. Willis J. Beecher 

ABEZ, a'bez: Used in AV (Josh 19 20) forEBEZ, 
which see. 

ABGAR, ab'gar, ABGARUS, ab-ga'rus, ABAGA- 
RUS, a-bag'a-rus ("APvapos, Abgaros): Written 
also Agbarus and Augarus. A king of Edessa. A 
name common to several kings (toparchs) of Edessa, 
Mesopotamia. One of these, Abgar, a son of 
Uchomo, the seventeenth (14th?) of twenty kings, 
according to the legend {HE, i.l3) sent a letter to 
Jesus, professing belief in His Messiahship and 
asking Him to come and heal him from an incurable 
disease (leprosy?), inviting Him at the same time 
to take refuge from His enemies in his city, "which 
is enough for us both." Jesus answering the letter 
blessed him, because he had believed on Him with- 
out having seen Him, and promised to send one of 
His disciples after He had risen from the dead. 
The apostle Thomas sent Judas Thaddeus, one of 
the Seventy, who healed him {Cod. Apoc. NT). 

A. L. Breslich 

ABHOR, ab-hor': "To cast away," "reject," 
"despise," "defy," "contemn," "loathe," etc. (1) 
Tr"* in the OT from the following Heb words amongst 
others: 125X3 {ba'ash), "to be or to become stink- 
ing" (1 S 27 12; 2 S 16 21); bya {ga'al), "to cast 
away as unclean," "to loathe"; cf Ezk 16 5 AV; 
7^P {Ifitg), "to loathe," "to fear" (Ex 1 12 m; 1 K 
11 25; Isa 7 16); fp.ffl {shalfag), "to detest" (Ps 
22 24); asn {ia'abh), 2?!? {ia'abh), "to contemn" 
(Dt 23 7); f\i<']'^. {dera'on), "an object of con- 
tempt," "an abhorring" (Isa 66 24; Dnl 12 2 m). 
(2) Tr'i in the NT from the following Gr words: 
bdeMssomai, which is derived from bdeo, "to stink" 
(Rom 2 22); apostug4d, derived from stug^o, "to 
hate," "to shrink from" (Rom 12 9). 

ABI, aODi Cax , 'Hbhl) : The name of the mother 
of King Hezekiah, as given in 2 K 18 2. Most 
naturally explained as a contraction of Abijah 
("Jehovah is a father," or "is my father"), found 
in the || passage in 2 Ch 29 1. The spelling in 
the oldest tr» seems to indicate that 'Sbhl is not a 
copyist's error, but a genuine contracted form. 
She is spoken of as the daughter of Zechariah, and 
was of course the wife of Ahaz. 

ABI, a'bi, in the composition of names C3S, 
'&bhi, "father") : The Heb words 'abh, "father," and 
'ah, "brother," are used in the forming of names, 
both at the beginning and at the end of words, 
e.g. Abram ("exalted one"), Joah ("Jehovah is 
brother"), Ahab ("father's brother"). At the 
beginning of a word, however, the modified forms 
'dhhi and '&hl are the ones commonly used, e.g. 



Ahimelech ("king's brother") and Abimelech (by 
the same analogy "king's father"). 

These forms have characteristics which compli- 
cate the question of their use in proper names. Es- 
pecially since the publication in 1896 of Studies in 
Hebrew Proper Names, by G. Buchanan Gray, the 
attention of scholars has been called to this matter, 
without the reaching of any perfect consensus of 

The word 'dbhi may be a nominative with an 
archaic ending ("father"), or in the construct 
state ("father-of"), or the form with the suffix 
("my father"). Hence a proper name constructed 
with it may supposably be either a clause or a 
sentence; if it is a sentence, either of the two words 
may be either subject or predicate. That is to 
say, the name Abimelech may supposably mean 
either "father of a king," or "a Idng is father," or 
"a father is king," or "my father is king," or "a 
king is my father." Further, the clause "father 
of a king" may have as many variations of mean- 
ing as there are varieties of the grammatical genitive. 
Further still, it is claimed that either the word 
father or the word king may, in a name, be a desig- 
nation of a deity. This gives a very large number 
of supposable meanings from which, in any case, 
to select the intended meaning. 

The older scholarship regarded all these names 
as construct clauses. For example, Abidan is 
"father of a judge." It explained different in- 
stances as being different varieties of the genitive 
construction; for instance, Abihail, "father of 
might," means mighty father. The woman's 
name Abigail, "father of exultation," denotes one 
whose father is exultant. Abishai, "father of 
Jesse," denotes one to whom Jesse is father, and 
so with Abihud, "father of Judah," Abiel, "fathel: 
of God," Abijah, "father of Jehovah." See the 
cases in detail in Gesenius' Lexicon. 

The more recent scholarship regards most or 
all of the instances as sentences. In some cases it 
regards the second element in a name as a verb 
or adj. instead of a noun; but that is not impor- 
tant, inasmuch as in Heb the genitive construction 
might persist, even with the verb or adj. But in 
the five instances last given the explanation, "my 
father is exultation," "is Jesse," 'is Judah," "is 
God," "is Jehovah," certainly gives the meaning in 
a more natural way than by explaining these names 
as construct clauses. 

There is sharp conflict over the question whether 
we ought- to regard the suffix pronoun as present 
in these names — whether the five instances should 
not rather be tr'' Jehovah is father, God is father, 
Judah is father, Jesse is father, exultation is father. 
The question is raised whether the same rule pre- 
vails when the second word is a name or a desig- 
nation of Deity as prevails in other cases. Should 
we explain one instance as meaning "my father is 
Jesse," and another as "God is father"? 

A satisfactory discussion of this is possible only 
under a comprehensive study of Bible names. 
The argument is more or less complicated by the 
fact that each scholar looks to see what bearing 
it may have on the critical theories he holds. In 
the Hebrew Lexicon of Dr. Francis Brown the 
explanations exclude the construct theory; in 
most of the instances they treat a name as a sen- 
tence with "my father" as the subject; when the 
second part of the name is a designation of Deity 
they commonly make that the subject, and either 
exclude the pronoun or give it as an alternative. 
For most persons the safe method is to remember 
that the final decision is not yet reached, and to 
consider each name by itself, counting the explana- 
tion of it an open question. See Names, Proper. 

The investigations concerning Sem proper names, 

both in and out of the Bible, have interesting theo- 
logical bearings. It has always been recognized 
that words for father and brother, when combined 
in proper names with Yah, Yahu, El, Baal, or other 
proper names of a Deity, indicated some relation 
of the person named, or of his tribe, with the 
Deity. It is now held, though with many differ- 
ences of opinion, that in the forming of proper 
names many other words, e.g. the words for king, 
lord, strength, beauty, and others, are also used 
as designations of Deity or of some particular 
Deity; and that the words father, brother, and the 
like may have the same use. To a certain extent 
the proper names are so many propositions in 
theology. It is technically possible to go very 
far in inferring that the people who formed such 
names thought of Deity or of some particular 
Deity as the father, the kinsman, the ruler, the 
champion, the strength, the glory of the tribe or of 
the individual. In particular one might infer the 
existence of a widely diffused doctrine of the father- 
hood of God. It is doubtless superfluous to add 
that at present one ought to be very cautious in 
drawing or accepting inferences in this part of the 
field of human study. Willis J. Bebchbr 

ABIA, a-bi'a, ABIAH, a-bl'ah : Variants for Abijah, 
which see. 

ABI-ALBON, ab-i-al'bon, a'bi-al'bon Cii^by "^nX 
'dbhi ^al'bhon, meaning not known. Gesenius 
infers from the Arab, a stem which would give the 
meaning "father of strength," and this is at worst 
not quite so groundless as the conjectures which 
explain 'al'^bhon as a textual misreading for 'el 
or ba'al) : Abi-albon the Arbathite was one of 
David's listed heroes (2 S 23 31), called Abiel 
the Arbathite in 1 Ch H 32. Presumably he was 
from Beth-arabah (Josh 15 6.61; 18 22). 

ABIASAPH, a-bl'a-saf, ab-i-a'saf (aOX''3i!: , '(J6M- 
'a^aph, "my father has gathered"): A descendant 
of Kohath the son of Levi (Ex 6 24; 1 Ch 6 23.37 
[8.22]; 9 19). In Ch the name is OD^aK, 'ebh- 
ySfaph, which seems to be a mere variant spelling. 
The Sam version has the same form in Ex. The 
list in Ex terminates with Abiasaph, who is to be 
regarded as the contemporary of Phinehas, the 
grandson of Aaron. The two lists in 1 Ch 6 lead 
up to the prophet Samuel and the singing com- 
panies which David is said to have organized. The 
list in 1 Ch 9 leads up to the Korahite porters 
of the time of Nehemiah. Apparently all the lists 
intentionally omit names, just names enough being 
given in each to indicate the line. 

Willis J. Beecheh 

ABIATHAR, a-bi'a-thar, ab-i-a'thar (in^ns, 
'ebhyathar, "father of super-excellence," or, "the 
super-excellent one is father." With changed phrase- 
ology these are the explanations commonly given, 
though "a father remains" would be more in accord 
with the ordinary use of the stem yathar. The pious 
Abiathar was still conscious that he had a Father, 
even after the butchery of his human relatives) : 

The Scriptures represent that Abiathar was de- 
scended from Phinehas the son of Eli, and through 
him from Ithamar the son of Aaron; 
1. The that he was the son of Ahimelech the 

Biblical head priest at Nob who, with his 

Account associates, was put to death by King 
Saul for alleyed conspiracy with 
David; that he had two sons, Ahimelech and Jona- 
than, the former of whom was, in Abiathar's life- 
time, prominent in the priestly service (1 S 21 
1-9; 22 7 ff; 2 S 8 17; 15 27 S; 1 Ch 18 16; 24 
3.6.31). See Ahimelech; Ahitub. 




Abiathar escaped from the massacre of the priests 
at Nob, and fled to David, carrying the ephod with 
him. This was a great accession to David's 
strength. Pubhc feeling in Israel was outraged 
by the slaughter of the priests, and turned strongly 
against Saul. The heir of the priesthood, and in 
his care the holy ephod, were now with David, and 
the fact gave to his cause prestige, and a certain 
character of legitimacy. David also felt bitterly 
his having been the unwilling cause of the death of 
Abiathar's relatives, and this made his heart warm' 
toward his friend. Presumably, also, there was a 
deep religious sympathy between them. 

Abiathar seems to have been at once recognized 
as David's priest, the medium of consultation with 
Jehovah through the ephod (1 S 22 20-23; 23 
6.9; 30 7.8). He was at the head of the priest- 
hood, along with Zadok (1 Ch 15 11), when David, 
after his conquests (1 Ch 13 5; cf 2 S 6), 
brought the ark to Jerus. The two men are men- 
tioned together as high priests eight times in the 
narrative of the rebellion of Absalom (2 S 16 24 ff), 
and are so mentioned in the last list of David's 
heads of departments (2 S 20 25). Abiathar 
joined with Adonijah in his attempt to seize the 
throne (1 K 1 7-42), and was for this deposed 
from the priesthood, though he was treated with 
consideration on account of his early comrade- 
ship with David (1 K 2 26.27). Possibly he 
remained high priest emeritus, as Zadok and 
Abiathar still appear as priests in the lists of the 
heads of departments for Solomon's reign(l K 4 4). 
Particularly apt is the passage in Ps 55 12-14, 
if one regards it as referring to the relations of 
David and Abiathar in the time of Adonijah. 

There are two additional facts which, in view of 
the close relations between David and Abiathar, 
must be regarded as significant. One is that Zadok, 
Abiathar's junior, is uniformly mentioned first, 
in all the many passages in which the two are men- 
tioned together, and is treated as the one who is 
especially responsible. Turn to the naiTative, 
and see how marked this is. The other similarly 
significant fact is that in certain especially respon- 
sible matters (1 Ch 24, 18 16; 2 S 8 17) the 
interests of the line of Ithamar are represented, 
not by Abiathar, but by his son Ahimelech. There 
must have been something in the character of Abia- 
thar to account for these facts, as well as for his 
deserting David for Adonijah. ' To sketch his 
character might be a work for the imagination 
rather than for critical inference; but it seems clear 
that though he was a man worthy of the friendship 
of David, he yet had weaknesses or misfortunes 
that partially incapacitated him. 

The characteristic priestly function of Abiathar 
is thus expressed by Solomon: "Because thou 
barest the ark of the Lord Jehovah before David 
my father" (1 K 2 26). By its tense the verb 
denotes not a habitual act, but the function of 
ark-bearing, taken as a whole. Zadok and Abia- 
thar, as high priests, had charge of the bringing of 
the ark to Jerus (1 Ch 15 11). We are not told 
whether it was again moved during the reign of 
David. Necessarily the priestly superintendence of 
the ark implies that of the sacrifices and services 
that were connected with the ark. The details in 
Kings indicate the existence of much of the cere- 
monial described in the Pent, while numerous 
additional Pentateuchal details are mentioned in 

A priestly function much emphasized is that of 
obtaining answers from God through the -ephod 
(1 S 23 6.9; 30 7). The word ephod (see 18 2 
18; 2 S 6 14) does not necessarily denote the 
priestly vestment with the Urim and Thummim 
(e.g. Lev 8 7.8), but if anyone denies that this 

was the ephod of the priest Abiathar, the burden 
of proof rests upon him. This is not the place for 
inquiring as to the method of obtaining divine 
revelations through the ephod. 

Abiathar's landed estate was at Anathoth in 
Benjamin (1 K 2 26), one of the cities assigned to 
the sons of Aaron (Josh 21 18). 

Apart from the men who are expressly said to be 
descendants of Aaron, this part of the narrative 
mentions priests three times. David's sons were 
priests (2 S 8 18). This is of apiece with David's 
carrying the ark on a new cart (2 S 6), before he 
had been taught by the death of Uzza. "And 
also Ira the Jairite was priest to the king" (2 S 20 
26 ERV). "And Zabud the son of Nathan was 
priest, friend of the king" (1 K 4 5 ERV). These 
instances seem to indicate that David and Solomon 
had each a private chaplain. As to the descent 
and function of these two "priests" we have not a 
word of information, and it is illegitimate to im- 
agine details concerning them which bring them 
into conflict with the rest of the record. 

No one will dispute that the account thus far 
given is that of the Bible record as it stands. 
Critics of certain schools, however, 
2. Critical do not accept the facts as thus re- 
Opinions corded. If a person is committed to 
Concerning the tradition that the Deuteronomic 
Abiathar and the priestly ideas of the Pent 
first originated some centuries later 
than Abiathar, and if he makes that tradition the 
standard by which to test his critical conclusions, 
he must of course regard the Biblical account of 
Abiathar as unhistorical. Either the record dis- 
proves the tradition or the tradition disproves the 
record. There is no third alternative. The men 
who accept the current critical theories understand 
this, and they have two ways of defending the 
theories against the record. In some instances they 
use devices for discrediting the record; in other 
instances they resort to harmonizing hypotheses, 
changing the record so as to make it agree with the 
theory. Without here discussing these matters, 
we must barely note some of their bearings in the 
case of Abiathar. 

For example, to get rid of the testimony of Jesus 
(Mk 2 26) to the effect that Abiathar was high 
priest and that the sanctuary at Nob was "the 
house of God," it is affirmed that either Jesus or 
the evangehst is here mistaken. The proof alleged 
for this is that Abiathar's service as priest did not 
begin till at least a few days later than the incident 
referred to. This is merely finical, though it is an 
argument that is gravely used by some scholars. 

Men affirm that the statements of the record as 
to the descent of the fine of Eli from Ithamar are 
untrue; that on the contrary we must conjecture 
that Abiathar claimed descent from Eleazar, his 
line being the alleged senior line of that family; 
that the senior line became extinct at his death, 
Zadok being of a junior line, if indeed he inherited 
any of the blood of Aaron. In making such affir- 
mations as these, men deny the Bible statements 
as resting on insufficient evidence, and substitute 
for them other statements which, confessedly, rest 
on no evidence at all. 

All such procedure is incorrect. Many are sus- 
picious of statements found in the Books of Ch; 
that gives them no right to use their suspicions as 
if they were perceptions of fact. Supposably one 
may think the record unsatisfactory, and may be 
within his rights in thinking so, but that does not 
authorize him to change the record except on the 
basis of evidence of some kind. If we treat the 
record of the times of Abiathar as fairness demands 
that a record be treated in a court of justice, or a 
scientific investigation, or a business proposition, 




or a medical case, we will accept the facts sub- 
stantially as they are found in S and K and Ch 
arid Mk. Willis J. Beecheb 

ABIB, a'bib (2''3¥ , 'dbhibh, young ear of barley 
or. other grain, Ex 9 31; Lev 2 14): The first 
month of the Israelitish year, called Nisan in Neh 
2 1; Est 3 7, is Abib in Ex 13 4; 23 15; 34 18; 
cf Dt 16 1. Abib is not properly a name of a 
month, but part of a descriptive phrase, "the month 
of young ears of grain." This may indicate the 
Israelitish way of determining the new year (Ex 
12 2), the year beginning with the new moon 
nearest or next preceding this stage of the growth 
of the barley. The year thus indicated was prac- 
tically the same with the old Bab year, and pre- 
sumably came in with Abraham. The Penta- 
teuchal laws do not introduce it, though they define 
it, perhaps to distinguish it from the Egyp wander- 
ing year. See Calendar. Willis J. Beechbr 

ABIDA, a-bi'da (S^^^, 'dbhidha', "father of 
knowledge," or "my father knows"): A son of 
Midian and grandson of Abraham and Keturah 
(Gen 25 4; 1 Ch 1 33). Abidah in AV in Gen. 

ABIDAH, a-bi'dah: Used in AV in Gen 25 4 for 
Abida, which see. 

ABIDAN, a-bi'dan {)y^^ , 'dbhldhan, "father is 
judge"): Abidan, son of Gideoni, was a "prince" 
of the children of Benjamin (Nu 2 22; 10 24). 
He was chosen to represent his tribe at the census 
in the wilderness of Sinai (Nu 1 11). When, on 
the erection, anointing and sanctification of the 
Tabernacle, the heads of Israel offered, Abidan 
offered on the ninth day (Nu 7 60.65). 

ABIDE, a-bid': OE word signifying progressively 
to "await," "remain," "lodge, ''^ "sojourn," "dwell," 
"continue," "endure"; represented richly in OT 
(AV) by 12 Heb and in NT by as many Gr words. 
In RV displaced often by words meaning "to so- 
journ," "dwell," "encamp." The Heb and Gr 
originals in most frequent use are STB^, yashabh, 
"to dwell"; m^"", m6nd, "to remain." "A. [sit or 
tarry] ye here" (Gen 22 5); "The earth a. [con- 
tinueth] forever" (Eccl 1 4); "Who can a. [bear 
or endure] the day?" (Mai 3 2); "Afflictions a. 
[await] me" (Acts 20 23). The past tense abode, 
in frequent use, has the same meaning. "His bow 
a. fremained] in strength" (Gen 49 24); "There he 
a.'' (dwelt) (Jn 10 40). . . 

Abode, as a noun (Gr /mi/-^, mont) twice m 
NT: "make our a. with him" (Jn 14 23); "man- 
sions," RVm "o6idiresr-places" (Jn 14 2). The soul 
of the true disciple and heaven are dwelling-places 
of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. 

DwiGHT M. Pratt 

ABIEL, a'bi-el, ab'yel, a-bi'el (bS^-iaX , 'AbU'el, 
"my father is God," or "God is father") : • 

(1) A descendant of Benjamin the son of Jacob. 
Father of Kish the father of King Saul, and also, 
apparently, the father of Ner the father of Saul s 
general, Abner (1 S 9 1; 14 51). 

(2) One of David's mighty men (1 Ch 11 32), 
called Abi-albon, which see, in 2 S 23 31. 

ABIEZER, ab-i-e'zer, a-bi-e'-zer (ITyinX , '< 
'ezer, "father of help," or "my father is help." 
lezer, lezerite [in AV Jeezer, Jeezerite], is Abiezer 
with the letter beth omitted) : 

(1) A descendant of Joseph the son of Jacob, and 
head of one of the families of Manasseh that settled 
W. of the Jordan (Nu 26 30; Josh 17 1-6; 1 Ch 
7 14-19). As he was great uncle to Zelophehad's 

daughters, who brought a case before Moses (Nu 
36), he must have been an old man at the time of 
the conquest. He was the son of Gilead the son 
of Machir, in the sense of being a more remote 
descendant, for Machir had sons before the death 
of Joseph (Gen 50 23). The Machir that possessed 
Gilead and Bashan because he was "a man of war" 
was the Manassite family of Machir, with Jair as 
its great general (Josh 17 1; 13 30.31; Nu 32 39- 
41; Dt 3 12-15). To Abiezer and other sons of 
Gilead territory was assigned W. of the Jordan. 

In later generations the name survived as that 
of the family to which Gideon belonged, and per- 
haps also of the region which they occupied (Jgs 
6 34; 8 2). They are also called Abiezrites (Jgs 6 
11.24; 8 32). The region was W. of Shechem, with 
Ophrah for its principal city. 

(2) One of David's mighty men, "the Anatho- 
thite" (2 S 23 27; 1 Ch 11 28), who was also 
one of David's month-by-month captains, his month 
being the ninth (1 Ch 27 12). 

Willis J. Beecheb 

ABIEZRITE, ab-i-ez'-rit, a-bi-ez'rit: The Gentile 
adj. of Abiezer, which see. 

ABIGAIL, ab'i-gal, ABIGAL, ab'i-gal (b'^S'^aS, 
'dbhlghayil, or 55''3S, 'Shhlghal, three times, or 
b'^5''2^, 'dbhughayil, once, or 5'?53i$, 'dhhighayil, 
once; "father," or "cause of joy"): 

(1) The wife of Nabal, a rich shepherd of southern 
Judaea, whose home was Maon (1 S 25 2.3); 
shortly after Nabal's death she became the wife 
of David. Nabal grazed his flocks in or along the 
Southern Wilderness, where David and his men 
protected them from marauding tribes, so that not 
a sheep was lost. When Nabal was sheep-shearing 
and feasting at Carmel (in Judaea), David sent 
messengers requesting provisions for himself and 
men. But Nabal, who was a churhsh fellow, 
answered the messengers insultingly and sent them 
away empty-handed. David, angered by such 
mean ingratitude, gathered his 400 warriors and 
set out to destroy Nabal and all he had (1 S 25 22). 
Meanwhile Abigail, a woman "of good understand- 
ing, and of a beautiful countenance" (ver 3), 
heard of the rebuff given the men of David by her 
husband; and fearing what vengeance David in 
his wrath might work, she gathered a considerable 
present of food (ver 18), and hastened to meet the 
approaching soldiers. Her beautiful and prudent 
words, as also her fair face, so won David that he 
desisted from his vengeful purpose and accepted 
her gift (vs 32-35). When Abigail told Nabal 
of his narrow escape, he was stricken with fear, and 
died ten days afterward. Shortly after this David 
took Abigail to be his wife, although about the 
same time, probably a little before, he had also 
taken Ahinoam (ver 43); and these two were 
with him in Gath (1 S 27 3). After David 
became king in Hebron, Abigail bore him his second 
son, Chileab (2 S 3 3) or Daniel, as he is called 
in 1 Ch 3 1. 

(2) Sister of David and mother of Amasa, at one 
time commander of David's army (1 Ch 2 16.17; 
Abigal 2 S 17 25). In the first passage she is 
called David's sister, along with Zeruiah; while in 
the second she is called the "daughter of Nahash." 
Several explanations of this connection with 
Nahash have been suggested, any one of which 
would be sufficient to remove contradiction: 
(1) That Nahash was another name of Jesse, as in 
Isa 14 29, mish-shoresh nahash yege' (Kim) ; (2) That 
Nahash was the wife of Jesse and by him mother of 
Abigail, ^rhich is least probable; (3) That Nahash, 
the father of Abigail and Zeruiah, having died, his 
widow became the wife of Jesse, and bore sons to 




him; (4) That the text of 2 S 17 25 has been cor- 
rupted, "daughter of Nahash" having crept into 
the text. At all events she was the sister of 
David by the same mother. Edward Mack 

ABIHAIL, ab'i-hal (b'^nins 'Sbhlhayil; in some 
MSS 57n"ilX 'dbhihayil, when feminine, but best 
reading is the former : ' 'father, or cause, of strength") : 
Five persons in the OT are called by this name: 
(1) A Levite and the father of Zuriel, who in the 
Wilderness was head of the house of Merari, Levi's 
youngest son (Nu 3 35) ; (2) The wife of Abishur, 
a man of the tribe of Judah, in the line of Hazron 
and Jerahmeel (1 Ch 2 29); (3) One of the heads 
of the tribe of Gad, who dwelt in Gilead of Bashan 
(1 Ch 5 14); (4) Either a wife of Rehoboam, king 
of Judah, or mother of his wife Mahalath, accord- 
ing to the interpretation of the text (2 Ch 11 18); 
probably the latter view is correct, since there is 
no conjunction in the text, and since the following 
ver (19) contemplates only one wife as already 
mentioned. This being true, she was the wife of 
Jerimath, a son of David, and daughter of Eliab, 
David's eldest brother. It is interesting to note 
this frequent intermarriage in the Davidic house; 
(5) Father of Queen Esther, who became wife of 
Xerxes (Biblical Ahasuerus) king of Persia, after the 
removal of the former queen, Vashti (Est 2 15; 
9 29). He was uncle of Mordecai. 

Edward Mack 

ABIHTI, a-bl'hu (SiniDX, 'Sbhihu', "father he 
is," or "my father he is"); Second son of Aaron, 
the high priest (Ex 6 23). With his older brother 
Nadab he "died before Jehovah," when the two 
"offered strange fire" (Lev 10 1.2). It may be 
inferred from the emphatic prohibition of wine 
or strong drink, laid upon the priests immediately 
after this tragedy, that the two brothers were going 
to their priestly functions in an intoxicated con- 
dition (Lev 10 8-11). Their death is mentioned 
three times in subsequent records (Nu 3 4; 26 61; 
1 Ch 24 2). 

ABIHUD, a-bi'hud (H^ninS, 'abhihudh, "father 
of majesty," or "my father is majesty," though 
some regard the second part as the proper name 
Judah): The son of Bela the oldest son of Benja- 
min (1 Ch 8 3). 

ABIJAH, a-bi'ja (H^aS or in;'3S [2 Ch 13 20.211, 
'dbhiyah or 'Sbhlyahu, "my father is Jehovah," or 
"Jehovah is father"): The name of six or more 
men and two women in the OT. 

(1) The seventh son of Becher the son of Benja- 
min (1 Ch 7 8). 

(2) The second son of the prophet Samuel (1 S 
8 2; 1 Ch 6 28 [6 13]). 

(3) The eighth among "the holy captains and 
captains of God" appointed by lot by David in 
connection with the priestly courses (1 Ch 24 10). 
Compare "Zacharias of the course of Abijah" 
(Lk 1 5). 

(4) A son of Jeroboam I of Israel (1 K 14 1-18). 
The narrative describes his sickness and his mother's 
visit to the prophet Ahijah. He is spoken of as 
the one member of the house of Jeroboam in whom 
there was "found some good thing toward Jehovah." 
With his death the hope of the dynasty perished. 

(5) The son and successor of Rehoboam king of 
Judah (1 Ch 3 10; 2 Ch 11 20—14 1). As to the 
variant name Abijam (1 K 14 31; 15 1.7.8) see 

The statements concerning Abijah's mother 
afford great opportunity for a person who is inter- 
ested in finding discrepancies in the Bible narrative. 
She is said to have been Maacah the daughter 

of Absalom (1 K 15 2; 2 Ch 11 20.21.22). As 
more than 5() years elapsed between the adoles- 
cence of Absalom and the accession of Rehoboam, 
the suggestion at once emerges that she may have 
been Absalom's daughter in the sense of being his 
granddaughter. But Maacah the daughter of 
Absalom was the mother of Asa, Abijam's son and 
successor (1 K 15 10.13; 2 Ch 15 16). Further 
we are explicitly told that Absalom had three sons 
and one daughter (2 S 14 27). It is inferred that 
the three sons died young, inasmuch as Absalom 
before his death built him a monument because 
he had no son (2 S 18 18). The daughter was 
distinguished for her beauty, but her name was 
Tamar, not Maacah. Finally, the narrative tells 
us that the name of Abijah's mother was "Micaiah 
the daughter of Uriel of Gibeah" (2 Ch 13 2). 

It is less difficult to combine all these statements 
into a consistent account than it would be to com- 
bine some pairs of them if taken by themselves. 
When all put together they make a luminous nar-- 
rative, needing no help from conjectural theories 
of discrepant sources or textual errors. It is natural 
to understand that Tamar the daughter of Absalom 
married Uriel of Gibeah; that their daughter was 
Maacah, named for her great-grandmother (2 S 
3 3; 1 Ch 3 2); that Micaiah is a variant of 
Maacah, as Abijah is of Abijam. Maacah mar- 
ried Rehoboam, the parties being second cousins 
on the father's side; if they had been first cousins 
perhaps they would not have married. Very 
likely Solomon, through the marriage, hoped to 
conciliate an influential party in Israel which still 
held the name of Absalom in esteem; perhaps also 
he hoped to supplement the moderate abilities of 
Rehoboam by the great abilities of his wife. She 
was a brilliant woman, and Rehoboam's favorite 
(2 Ch 11 21). On Abijah's accession she held at 
court the influential position of king's mother; 
and she was so strong that she continued to hold 
it, when, after a brief reign, Abijah was succeeded 
by Asa; though it was a position from which Asa 
had the authority to depose her (1 K 15 13; 
2 Ch 15 16). 

The account in Ch deals mainly with a decisive 
victory which, it says, Abijah gained over northern 
Israel (2 Ch 13), he having 400,000 men and 
Jeroboam 800,000, of whom 500,000 were slain. 
It is clear that these numbers are artificial, and were 
so intended, whatever may be the key to their 
meaning. Abijah's speech before the battle pre- 
sents the same view of the religious situation which 
is presented in Kings and Amos and Hosea, though 
with fuller priestly details. The orthodoxy of 
Abijah on this one occasion is not in conflict with 
the representation in Kings that he followed 
mainly the evil ways of his father Rehoboam. In 
Chronicles coarse luxury and the multiplying of 
wives are attributed to both father and son. 

(6) A priest of Nehemiah's time, who sealed the 
covenant (Neh 10 7). Conjecturally the same with 
the one mentioned in Neh 12 4.17. 

(7) The wife of Judah's grandson Hezron, to 
whom was traced the origin of Tekoa (1 Ch 2 24). 

(8) The mother of King Hezekiah (2 Ch 29 1) 
called Abi in 2 K. See Abi. 

Willis J. Bebcher 
ABIJAM, a-bl'jam (Q^IS:, 'abhlyam, "father of 
sea," or, "father of west"): The name given in 
Kings (1 K 14 31; 15 1.7.8) to the son of Reho- 
boam who succeeded him as king of Judah. See 

The name has puzzled scholars. Some have 
proposed, by adding one letter, to change it into 
"father of his people." Others have observed that 
the Gr rendering in Kings is Abeiou. Either the 
Heb copy used by the Gr translator read 'abhlyahu, 




Abijah, or else the translator substituted the form 
of the name which was to him more familiar. A few 
existing copies of the Heb have the reading Abijah, 
and Mt 1 7 presupposes that as the OT reading. So 
they infer that Abijam in K is an erroneous reading 
for Abijah. This seems at present to be the pre- 
vailing view, and it is plausible. It would be more 
convincing, however, if the name occurred but once 
in the passage in Kings, instead of occurring five 
times. It is improbable that a scribe would repeat 
the same error five times within a few sentences, 
while a translator, if he changed the name once, 
would of course change it the other four times. 

Exploration has revealed the fact that the whole 
region near the eastern end of the Mediterranean 
was known as "the west." "Father of the west" 
is not an inapt name for Rehoboam to give to the 
boy who, he expects, wiU inherit the Idngdom of 
Solomon and David. The effect of the secession 
of the ten tribes was to make that name a burlesque, 
and one does not wonder that it was superseded by 
Abijah, "My father is Jehovah." 

Willis J. Beechbr 

ABILA, ab'i-la. See Abilene. 

ABILENE, a-bi-le'ne ('APfiXiiv^, Abeileni, BA; 
'APiXtiv^, Abileni, S") : Mentioned in Lk 3 1 as 
the tetrarchy of Lysanias at the time when John 
the Baptist began his ministry. The district 
derived its name from Abila, its chief town, which 
was situated, according to the Itinerarium An- 
tonini, 18 Roman miles from Damascus on the 
way to Heliopolis (Baalbec) . This places it in the 
neighborhood of the village of Suk Wady Barada 
(see Abana), near which there are considerable 
ancient remains, with an inscription in Gr stating 
that a "freedman of Lysanias the tetrarch" made a 
wall and built a temple, and another in Lat record- 
ing the repair of the road "at the expense of the 
.Abilenians." The memory of the ancient name 
probably survives in the Moslem legend which 
places the tomb of Abel in a neighboring height 
where there are ruins of a temple. Jos calls this 
Abila, he Lusaniou, ht. "the A. of Lysanius," thus 
distinguishing it from other towns of the same name, 
and as late as the time of Ptolemy (cir 170 AD) the 
name of Lysanias was associated with it. 

The territory of Abilene was part of the Ituraean 
Kingdom, which was broken up when its king, 
Lysanias, was put to death by M. Antonius, o 35 
BC. The circumstances in which A. became a 
distinct tetrarchy are altogether obscure, and 
nothing further is known of the tetrarch Lysanias 
(_Ant, XIX, V, 1; XX, ii, 1). In 37 AD the tet- 
rarchy, along with other territories, was granted 
to Agrippa I, after whose death in 44 AD it was 
administered by procurators until 53 AD, when 
Claudius conferred it again, along with neigh- 
boring territories, upon Agrippa II. On Agrippa s 
death, toward the close of the 1st cent., his kingdom 
was incorporated in the province of Syria. See 
Lysanias. C. H. Thomson 

, ABILITY, a-bil'i-ti (Svivapiis, dilnamis, or lo-x*s, 
ischus): Variously used of resources, material, 
mental and spiritual; e.g. of wealth, "gave after 
their a." (Ezr 2 69); of mental endowment, a. 
to stand in the king's palace" (Dnl 14); of tal- 
ents and character, "several a." (Mt 25 15)1 oj 
spiritual strength, "minister, as of the a. which God 
giveth" (AV 1 Pet 4 11). It thus may signify 
either possessions, native capacity, or gifts of the 
Holy Spirit. 

ABIMAEL, a-bim'a-el, ab-i-ma'el (bS^'QiDSJ, 
'&bhlma'el, "my father is God," or "God is father") : 
The ninth of the thirteen sons of Joktan, who was 

descendant of Shem, and son of Eber, and brother 
of Peleg in whose days the earth was divided 
(Gen 10 25-29; 1 Ch 1 19-23). Like some of the 
other names in this list, the name is linguistically 
south Arabian, and the tribes indicated are south 
Arabians. On the Arab, elements in Heb proper 
names see Hal(5vy, Melanges d'epigraphie et d'arche- 
ologie s6mitiques; ZDMG, esp. early in 1883; D. H. 
Mtiller, Epigraphie Denkmdler aus Arabien; Glaser, 
Skizze der Oesch. und Oeog. Arabiens; and by index 
Hommel, Ancient Hebrew Tradition; and Gray, 
Hebrew Proper Names; and F. Giesebrecht, Die 
alttestamentliche Schdtzung des Gottesnamens. 

Willis J. Beecheb 

ABIMELECH, a-bim'e-lek (TT^iainX, 'dbhlmelekh, 
"father of a king"): A name borne by five OT 

(1) The name of two kings of Philistia; the first 
was a contemporary of Abraham, the second, 
probably son of the former, was king in the days 
of Isaac. It is quite possible that Abimelech was 
the royal title rather than the personal name, since 
in the title of Ps 34 we find it applied to the king 
of Gath, elsewhere known by his personal name, 
Achish (1 S 27 2.3). Shortly after the destruc- 
tion of Sodom Abraham journeyed with his herds 
and flocks into the extreme S.E. country of Pal 
(Gen 20). While sojourning at Gerar, the city 
of Abimelech, king of the Phili country, he made 
believe that Sarah was his sister (ver 2), and 
Abimelech took her, intending to make her one of 
his wives. But God rebuked him in a dream, 
besides sending barrenness on the women of his 
household (vs 3.17). After Abimelech had re- 
proved Abraham most justly for the deception, 
he dealt generously with him, loading him with 
presents and granting him the liberty of the land 
(vs 14.15). When contention had arisen between 
the servants of the two men over the wells of water 
the two men made a covenant at a well, which 
took its name, Beersheba, from this fact of covenant- 
making (Gen 21 31.32). 

(2) Nearly a cent, later than the events con- 
nected with the first Abimelech, as outlined above, 
a second Abimelech, king of the Philistines, is men- 
tioned in relations with Isaac (Gen 26), who in 
time of grievous famine went down from his home, 
probably at Hebron, to Gerar. Fearing for his 
fife because of his beautiful wife, Rebekah, he called 
her his sister, just as Abraham had done -with 
reference to Sarah. Neither Abimelech nor any 
of his people took Rebekah to wife — quite a vari- 
ation from the Abrahamic incident; but when the 
falsehood was detected, he upbraided Isaac for 
what might have happened, continuing neverthe- 
less to treat him most graciously. Isaac continued 
to dwell in the vicinity of Gerar, until contention 
between his herdsmen and those of Abimelech 
became too violent; then he moved away by 
stages, reopening the wells digged by his father 
(vs 18-22). Finally, a covenant was made between 
Abimelech and Isaac at Beersheba, just as had 
been made between Abraham and the first Abime- 
lech (Gen 26 26-33). The two kings of Philistia 
were probably father and son. 

(3) The title of Ps 34 mentions another Abime- 
lech who in all probability is the same as Achish 
king of Gath (1 S 21 10—22 1); with whom 
David sought refuge when fleeing from Saul, and 
with whom he was dwelling at the time of the Phili 
invasion of Israel, which cost Saul his kingdom and 
his life (1 S 27). It appears from this that Abime- 
lech was the royal title, and not the personal name 
of the Phili kings. 

(4) A son of Gideon (Jgs 9) who aspired to be 
king after the death of his father, and did rule three 




years (ver 22). He first won the support of the 
members of his mother's family and their recom- 
mendation of himself to all Israel (vs 3.4). He 
then murdered all the sons of his father, seventy 
in number, at Ophrah, the family home in the tribe 
of Manasseh, Jotham the youngest son alone 
escaping (ver 5). After this Abimelech was made 
ruler by an assembly of the people at Shechem. 
An insurrection led by Gaal the son of Ebed having 
broken out in Shechem, Abimelech, although he 
succeeded in capturing that city, was wounded 
to death by a mill-stone, which a woman dropped 
from the wall upon his head, while he was stormmg 
the citadel of Thebez, into which the defeated rebels 
had retreated, after that city also had been taken 
(vs 50-53). Finding that he was mortally wounded 
and in order to avoid the shame of death at a 
woman's hand, he required his armor-bearer to 
kill him with his sword (ver 54). His cruel treat- 
ment of the Shechemites (vs 46-49), when they 
took refuge from him in their strong tower, was a 
just judgment for their acquiescence in his crimes 
(vs 20.57); while his own miserable death was 
retribution for his bloody deeds (ver 56). 

(5) A priest in the days of David; a descendant 
of Ithamar and Eli, and son of Abiathar (1 Ch 18 
16). In the LXX and in 1 Ch 24 he is called 
AWmelech; but is not to be confused with Abime- 
lech, the father of Abiathar, and therefore his 
grandfather. He shared with Zadok, of the line 
of Ithamar, the priestly office in the reign of David 
(1 Ch 24 31). Edward Mack 

ABINADAB, a-bin'a-dab (3"r5S , 'abhlnd- 
dhabh, "father of wiUingness," or, "my father is 
willing." This is according to the ordinary usage 
of the second word in the name — "willing" rather 
than "munificent" or "noble"): 

(1) The man in whose house the men of Kiriath- 
jearim placed the ark, after its return from the 
land of the Philis, his house being either in Gibeah ' 
of Benjamin or "in the hill" (1 S 7 1; 2 S 6 3.4). 
To account for the ambiguity note that gibh'ah 
means hill, and that the place-name Gibeah or- 
dinarily has the definite article. It is natural 
to think that Abinadab was himself a man of 
Kiriath-jearim, though the account does not 
exphcitly say so. The record is that the men of 
Kiriath-jearim were summoned to take charge 
of the ark at a time when no one else dared to have 
it (V S 6 20.21); and the implication seems to be 
that they had no option to refuse. Possibly this 
was due to their being Gibeonites, and hereditary 
"bondmen" of "the house of my God" (Josh 9 
17.23). However this may be, they "sanctified" 
Abinadab's son Eleazar to have charge of the ark. 
According to the Heb and some of the Gr copies, 
the ark was in Gibeah in the middle of the reign 
of King Saul (1 S 14 18). 

About a century later, according to the Bible 
numbers, David went with great pomp to Kiriath- 
jearim, otherwise known as Baalah or Baale-judah, 
to bring the ark from Kiriath-jearim, out of the 
house of Abinadab in the hill (or, in Gibeah), and 
place it in Jerus (1 Ch 13; 2 S 6). _ The new cart 
was driven by two descendants of Abinadab. There 
may or may not have been another Abinadab then 
hving, the head of the house. 

(2) The second of the eight sons of Jesse, one of 
the three who were in Saul's army when Goliath 
gave his challenge (1 S 16 8; 17 13; 1 Ch 2 13). 

(3) One of the sons of King Saul (1 Ch 8 33; 
9 39; 10 2; 1 S 31 2). He died in the battle of 
Gilboa, along with his father and brothers. 

(4) In 1 K 4 11 AV has "the son of Abinadab," 
where RV has Ben-abinadab, which see. 

Willis J. Beecher 

ABINOAM, a-bin'6-am, ab-i-no'am (Dy3''?S , 
'abhind'am, "father of pleasantness," or, "my 
father is pleasantness"): A man of Kedesh-naph- 
tali, the father of Barak who defeated the army of 
Jabin and Sisera (Jgs 4 6.12; 6 1.12). 

ABIRAM, a-bl'ram (D'3"'5i? , 'dbhiram, "exalted 
father," or, "my father is an exalted one"): 

(1) The son of Ehab the son of Pallu the son of 
Reuben (Nu 26 5ff; Dt 11 6). In company 
with his brother Dathan and Korah the Levite 
and others, he disputed the authority of Moses 
and Aaron in the wilderness (Nu 16-17, 26; Dt 
11 6; Ps 106 17). Two hundred and fifty followers 
of Korah perished by fire at the doorway of the 
tent of meeting. Dathan and Abiram refused to 
come to the tent of meeting, at the summons of 
Moses; and the earth opened where their tents 
were, and swallowed them and their families and 
their goods. See Korah. 

(2) The firstborn son of Hiel the Bethelite, who 
rebuilt Jericho in the time of Ahab (1 K 16 34; 
cf Josh 6 26) . This incident has recently acquired 
a new interest owing to discoveries made at Gezer 
and Megiddo concerning foundation sacrifices as 
anciently offered in Palestine. One should not 
be too positive in making statements concerning 
this, but the following is a possible interpretation 
of the record. The curse pronounced by Joshua 
on the man who should rebuild Jericho was of a 
piece with the other details, Jericho being treated 
exceptionally, as a city placed under the ban. The 
language of Joshua's curse is capable of being 
translated: 'Cursed be the man iDefore Jehovah 
who shall .... build .... Jericho; [who] shall 
lay its foundation in his firstborn, and set up its 
gates in his youngest.' According to this inter- 
pretation the death of the builder's eldest and 
youngest sons is not spoken of as the penalty in- 
volved in the curse, but as an existing horrible 
custom, mentioned in order to give solemnity to 
the diction of the curse. The writer in Kings cites 
the language of the curse by Joshua. The context 
in which he mentions the affair suggests that he 
regards Kiel's conduct as exceptionally flagrant 
in its wickedness. Hiel, in defiance of Jehovah, not 
only built the city, but in building it revived the 
horrible old Canaanite custom, making his first- 
born son a foundation sacrifice, and his youngest 
son a sacrifice at the completion of the work. 

Willis J. Beecher 
ABIROW, a-bi'ron ('APeip<6v, Abeiron) : 
(1) The LXX form (Ecclus 45 18 AV) of Abiram, 
one of the sons of Eliab, who, with his brother 
Dathan, and with one of the same tribe, joined the 
conspiracy against Moses and Aaron (Nu 16; 26 9; Dt 11 6; Ps 106 17). 

_ (2) The eldest son of Hiel, the BetheUte, who 
died prematurely, thus fulfilling the doom pro-, 
nounced on the posterity of him who should under- 
take to rebuild Jericho (1 K 16 34). See Abiram. 

ABISEI, ab-i-se'I. See Abissei. 

ABISHAG, ab'i-shag, a-bi'shag (aiailS , 'Shhlr- 
shagh, apparently, "father of wandering," that is, 
"cause of wandering," or "my father wanders"): 
The Shunammite woman who became nurse to 
King David (1 K 1 1-4.15; 2 17.21.22). She was 
chosen for the service with great care on account 
of her youth and beauty and physical vigor. She 
ministered to the king, that is, waited on him as 
personal attendant and nurse. She also "cher- 
ished" him in his feebleness — gave to him through 
physical contact the advantage of her superabun- 
dant vitality. This was a mode of medical treat- 
ment recommended by the servants of the king. 




and it appears to have been not wholly unsuccessful. 
She had an intimate knowledge of the condition of 
David, and was present at the interview of Bath- 
sheba with David which resulted in the placing of 
Solomon on the throne. If that act had been 
questioned she would have been a most important 
witness. By reason of this and of her personal 
charms, she might become a strong helper to any 
rival of Solomon who should intrigue to supplant 
him. Adonijah sought Abishag in marriage. On 
the basis of this and of such other evidence as may 
supposably have been in his possession, Solomon 
put Adonijah to death as an intriguer. 

Willis J. Beechbb 
ABISHAI, ab'i-shi, a-bi'shi 0«ias, 'dbhishai, 
in Ch "^TBIlSl , 'abhshai; meaning is doubtful, prob- 
ably "my father is Jesse," BOB): Son of Zeruiah, 
David's sister, and one of the three famous brothers, 
of whom Joab and Asahel were the other two 
(2 S 2 18). He was chief of the second group of 
three among David's "mighty men" (2 S 23 18). 
He first appears with David, who was in the Wilder- 
ness of Ziph, to escape Saul. When David called 
for a volunteer to go down into Saul's camp by 
night, Abishai responded, and counseled the killing 
of Saul when they came upon the sleeping king 
(1 S 26 6-9). In the skirmish between the men 
of Ishbosheth and the men of David at Gibeon, 
in which Asahel was killed by Abner, Abishai was 
present (2 S 2 18.24). He was with and aided 
Joab in the cruel and indefensible murder of Abner, 
in revenge for their brother Asahel (2 S 3 30). 
In David's campaign against the allied Ammonites 
and Syrians, Abishai led the attack upon the 
Ammonites, while Joab met the Syrians; the 
battle was a great victory for Israel (2 S 10 10-14) . 
He was always faithful to David, and remained 
with him, as he fled from Absalom. When Shimei, 
of the house of Saul, cursed the fleeing king, Abishai 
characteristically wished to kill him at once (2 S 
16 8.9); and when the king returned victorious 
Abishai advised the rejection of Shimei's peni- 
tence, and his immediate execution (2 S 19 21). 
In the battle with Absalom's army at Mahanaim 
Abishai led one division of David's army, Joab 
and Ittai commanding the other two (2 S 18 2). 
With Joab he put down the revolt against David 
of Sheba, a man of Benjamin (2 S 20 6.10), at 
which Joab treacherously slew Amasa hia cousin 
and rival, as he had likewise murdered Abner, 
Abishai no doubt being party to the crime. In a 
battle with the Philistines late in his life, David 
was faint, being now an old man, and was in danger 
of death at the hands of the Phili giant Ishbihenob 
when Abishai came to his rescue and killed the 
giant (2 S 21 17). In the list of David's heroes 
(2 S 23) Abishai's right to leadership of the 
"second three" is based upon his overthrowing 
three hundred men with his spear (ver 18). 
He does not appear in the struggle of Adonijah 
against Solomon, in which Joab was the leader, 
and therefore is supposed to have died before that 
time. , , , 

He was an impetuous, courageous man, but less 
cunning than his more famous brother Joab, 
although just as cruel and relentless toward rival 
or foe. David understood and feared their hard- 
ness and cruelty. Abishai's best trait was his 
unswerving loyalty to his kinsman, David. 

Edward Mack 
ABISHALOM, a-bish'a-lom: Variant of Ab- 
salom, which see. 

ABISHUA, a-bish'ti-a, abi-shoo'a (r'ltEJinXj 
'/ibhishu'^\ uncertain, perhaps "father of wealth," 
or "my father is wealth") : 

(1) A son of Bela the son of Benjamin (1 Ch 8 4). 

(2) The son of Phinehas, who was grandson to 
Aaron (1 Ch 6 4.5.50; Ezr 7 5). 

ABISHUR, a-bi'shur (inB"'5S, '&bhlshur, "my 
father is a wall"): Great-grandson of Jerahmeel 
and Atarah, Jerahmeel being great-grandson of 
Judah. Abishur was son of Shammai, and was 
the husband of Abihail, and the father of sons 
(1 Ch 2 28.29). 

ABISSEI, a-bis'e-I (AV Abisei): An ancestor 
of Ezra (2 Esd 1 2) = Abisue (1 Esd 8 2) and 
Abishua (1 Ch 6 4ff; e¥7 5). 

ABISUE, a-bis'u-e (B, 'Apio-aC, Abisai; A, Abi- 
souai; AV Abisum= Abishua [1 Ch 6 4ff; Ezr 
7 6] and Abissei [2 Esd 12]): An ancestor of Ezra 
(1 Esd 8 2). 

ABISUM, ab'i-sum. See Abisue (Apoc). 

ABITAL, ab'i-tal, a-bi'tal (buiSX, 'dbhital, "my 
father is dew"): One of the wives of King David. 
In the duplicated list (2 S 3 4; 1 Ch 3 3) in 
which the sons born to David in Hebron are men- 
tioned and numbered, the fifth is said to be 
Shephatiah the son of Abital. 

ABITUB, ab'i-tub, a-bi'tub (aWnS, 'dbhitubh, 
"father of goodness," or, "my father is goodness") : 
In AV Ahitub. A descendant of Benjamin and son 
of Shaharaim and Hushim, born in the field of Moab 
(1 Ch 8 11). 

ABIUD, a-bl'ud ('ApioiS, Abioiid, perhaps "my 
father is majesty" ; see Abihud) : Mentioned in the 
genealogy of Jesus (Mt 1 13 and not elsewhere) as 
the son of Zerubbabel. See Genealogt. 

ABJECT, ab'jekt: Only as a noun, and but once 
(Ps 35 15) for riD5. , nekheh, lit. "smitten ones," 
i.e. "men of the lowest grade" (Hengstenberg, 
Delitzsch), "the rabble," defined by the succeeding 
clause as those of such inferior station that they 
were unknown. 

ABLE, aVl: The Gr Sivaiwj., d-dnamai, "to have 
power," may refer either to inherent strength, or 
to the absence of external obstacles, or to what 
may. be allowable or permitted. The Gr lo-x^ia, 
isck&o, as in Lk 13 24; Jn 21 6, refers always to 
the first of the above meanings. The use of the 
word as an adj. in AV of 2 Cor 3 6, is misleading, 
and has been properly changed in RV into "suffi- 
cient as ministers," i.e. "hath fitted us to be 

ABLUTION, ab-lu'shun: The rite of ablution for 
religious purification seems to have been practised 
in some form in all lands and at all times. The 
priests of Egypt punctiliously practised it (Herod- 
otus ii.37). The Greeks were warned "never with 
unwashed hands to pour out the black wine at 
morn to Zeus" (Hesiod, Opera et Dies v.722; cf 
Homer, Iliad vi.266; Od. iv.759). The Romans 
also observed it (Virgil, Aeneid ii.217); as did and 
do Orientals in general (cf Koran, Sura 5 8, etc). 

Ablutions for actual or ritual purification form 
quite a feature of the Jewish life and ceremonial. 
No one was allowed to enter a holy place or to 
approach God by prayer or sacrifice without having 
first performed the rite of ablution, or "sanctifi- 
cation," as it was sometimes called (Ex 19 10; 
1 S 16 5; 2 Ch 29 6; cf Jos, Ant, XIV, xi, 5). 

Three kinds of washing are recognized in Bibhcal 
and rabbinical law: (1) washing of the hands, 




(2) washing of the hands and feet, and (3) immer- 
sion of the whole body in water. (1 and 2 = Gr 
vItttu, nlpto; 3 = Gr Xoi)w, loud). 

Something more than an echo of a universal 
practice is found in the Scriptures. The rabbis 
claimed to find support for ceremonial hand-wash- 
ing in Lev 15 11. David's words, "I will wash 
my hands in innocency: so will I compass thine 
altar, O Jeh" (Ps 26 6; cf Ps 73 13), are re- 
garded by them as warranting the inference that 
ablution of the hands was prerequisite to any holy 
act. This is the form of ablution, accordingly, 
which is most universally and scrupulously prac- 
tised by Jews. Before any meal of which bread 
forms a part, as before prayer, or any act of wor- 
ship, the hands must be solemnly washed in pure 
water; as also after any unclean bodily function, 
or contact with any unclean thing. Such hand- 
washings probably arose naturally from the fact 
that the ancients ate with their fingers, and so 
were first for physical cleansing only; but they 
came to be ceremonial and singularly binding. 
The Talm abundantly shows that eating with 
unwashed hands came to be reckoned a matter of 
highest importance — "tantamount to committing 
an act of unchastity, or other gross crime." Akiba, 
when in prison, went without water given him to 
quench his thirst, rather than neglect the rite of 
ablution ("Er. 216). Only in extreme cases, 
according to the Mish, as on a battlefield, might 
people dispense with it. Simeon, the Essene, "the 
Saint" (Toseph. Kelim i.6), on entering the holy 
place without having washed his hands, claiming 
that he was holier than the high priest because of 
his ascetic life, was excommunicated, as under- 
mining the authority of the Elders (cf ^Eduy. 6 6). 

Washing of the hands and feet is prescribed by 
the Law only for those about to perform priestly 
functions (cf Koran, Sura 6 8, in contrast: "When 
ye prepare yourselves for prayer, wash your faces 
and hands up to the elbows, and wipe your heads 
and your feet to the ankles"; Hughes, Diet, of 
Islam). For example, whenever Moses or Aaron 
or any subordinate priest desired to enter the 
sanctuary (Tabernacle) or approach the altar, he 
was required to wash his hands and feet from the 
laver which stood between the Tabernacle and the 
altar (Ex 30 19; 40 31). The same rule held in 
the Temple at Jerusalem. The washing of the 
whole body, however, is the form of ablution most 
specifically and exactingly required by the Law. 
The cases in which the immersion of the whole 
body is commanded, either for purification or 
consecration, are very numerous. For example, 
the Law prescribed that no leper or other unclean 
person of the seed of Aaron should eat of holy 
flesh until he had washed his whole body in water 
(Lev 22 4-6); that anyone coming in contact 
with a person having an unclean issue, or with 
any article used by such a one, should wash his 
whole body (16 5-10); that a sufferer from an 
unclean issue (15 16.18); a menstruous woman 
(2 S 11 2.4), and anyone who touched a men- 
struous woman, or anything used by her, should 
Ukewise immerse the whole person in water (Lev 
15 19-27): that the high priest who ministered 
on the Day of Atonement (16 24-28), the priest 
who tended the red heifer (Nu 19 7.8.19), and 
every priest at his installation (Ex 29 4; 40 12) 
should wash his whole body in water. Cf 'divers 
baptisms' (immersions) in He 9 10, and see Broadus 
on Mt 15 2-20 with footnote. (For another view 
on bathing see Kennedy in HDB, I, 257 v.) 

Bathing in the modern and non-rehgious sense 
is rarely mentioned in the Scriptures (Ex 2 5 
Pharaoh's daughter; 2 S 11 2 RV Bathsheba, 
and the interesting case 1 K 22 38). Public 

baths are first met with in the Gr period — included 
in the "place of exercise" (1 Mace 1 14), a,nd 
remains of such buildings from the Rom period 
are numerous. Recently a remarkable series of 
bath-chambers have been discovered at Gezer, in 
Pal, in connection with a building which is sup- 
posed to be the palace built by Simon Maccabaeus 
(Kennedy [illust. in PEFS, 1905, 294 f]). 

The rite of ablution was observed among early 
Christians also. Eusebius [HE, X, 4.40) tells of 
Christian churches being supphed with fountains 
or basins of water, after the Jewish custom of pro- 
viding the laver for the use of the priests. The 
Apos Const (VIII.32) have the rule: "Let all the 
faithful .... when they rise from sleep, before 
they go to work, pray, after having washed them- 
selves" (nipsdmenoi) . 

The attitude of Jesus toward the rabbinical law 
of ablution is significant. Mk (7 3) prepares the 
way for his record of it by explaining, 'The Phar- 
isees and all the Jews eat not except they wash 
their hands to the wrist' (pugmt). (See LTJM, 
II, 11). According to Mt 16 1-20 and Mk 7 1-23 
Pharisees and Scribes that had come from Jerusa- 
lem (i.e. the strictest) had seen some of Jesus' 
disciples eat bread with unwashed hands, and they 
asked Him: "Why do thy disciples transgress the 
tradition of the elders? for they wash not their 
hands when they eat bread." Jesus' answer was to 
the Jews, even to His own disciples, in the highest 
degree surprising, paradoxical, revolutionary (cf 
Mt 12 8). They could not but see that it applied 
not merely to hand-washing, but to the whole 
matter of clean and unclean food; and this to 
them was one of the most vital parts of the Law 
(cf Acts 10 14). Jesus saw that the masses of 
the Jews, no less than the Pharisees, while scrupu- 
lous about ceremonial purity, were careless of 
inward purity. So here, as in the Sermon on the 
Mount, and with reference to the Sabbath (Mt 
12 1 ff). He would lead them into the deeper and 
truer significance of the Law, and thus prepare 
the way for setting aside not only the traditions 
of the elders that made void the commandments 
of God, but even the prescribed ceremonies of the 
Law themselves, if need be, that the Law in its 
higher principles and meanings might be "fulfilled." 
Here He proclaims a principle that goes to the heart 
of the whole matter of true religion in saying: 
"Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites" 
(Mk 7 6-13) — you who make great pretense of 
devotion to God, and insist strenuously on the 
externals of His service, while at heart you do not 
love Him, making the word of God of none effect 
for the sake of your tradition! 

LiTEEATTjRB. — Por list of Older authorities see McClln- 
tock and Strong, Cyclopedia; Nowack, Biblische Archae- 
ologie, II, 275-99; and Spitzer, Ueber Baden und Bttder 
bei den alien Hebrdern, 1884. 

Geo. B. Eager 
ABNER, ab'ner (~l3?ii!, 'abhner; in 1 S 14 50 
the Heb has the fuller form, 13^5^, 'dbhiner, 
Abiner; cf Abiram by the side of Abram; meaning, 
"my father is a lamp") : Captain of the host under 
Saul and Ishbosheth (Eshbaal). He was Saul's 
cousin; Ner the father of Abner and Kish the 
father of Saul being brothers, the sons of Abiel 
(1 S 14 50f). In 1 Ch 8 33; 9 39 the text 
appears to be faulty; read: "And Ner begat Abner, 
and Kish begat Saul." According to 1 Ch 27 21 
Abner had a son by the name of Jaasiel. 

Abner was to Saul what Joab was to David. 
Despite the many wars waged by Saul, we hear 
little of Abner during Saul's lifetime. Not even 
in the account of the battle of Gilboa is mention 
made of him. Yet both his high office and his 
kinship to the king must have brought the two 




men in close contact. On festive occasions it was 
the custom of Abner to sit at table by the king's 
side (1 S 20 25). It was Abner who introduced 
the young David fresh from his triumph over 
Goliath to the king's court (so according to the 
account in 1 S 17 67). We find Abner accom- 
panying the king in his pursuit of David (1 S 26 
5 ff). Abner is rebuked by David for his negli- 
gence in keeping watch over his master (ib, 15) . 

Upon the death of Saul, Abner took up the cause 
of the young heir to the throne, Ishbosheth, whom 
he forthwith removed from the neighborhood of 
David to Mahanaim in the East-Jordanic country. 
There he proclaimed him king over all Israel. By 
the pool of Gibeon he and his men met Joab and 
the servants of David. Twelve men on each side 
engaged in combat which ended disastrously for 
Abner who fled. He was pursued by Asahel, 
Joab's brother, whom Abner slew. Though Joab 
and his brother Abishai sought to avenge their 
brother's death on the spot, a truce was effected; 
Abner was permitted to go his way after three 
hundred and threescore of his men had fallen. 
Joab naturally watched his opportunity. Abner 
and his master soon had a quarrel over Saul's 
concubine, Rizpah, with whom Abner was intimate. 
It was certainly an act of treason which Ishbosheth 
was bound to resent. The disgruntled general 
made overtures to David; he won over the tribe 
of Benjamin. With twenty men of them he came 
to Hebron and arranged with the king of Judah 
that he would bring over to his side all Israel. 
He was scarcely gone when Joab learned of the 
affair; without the knowledge of David he recalled 
him to Hebron where he slew him, "for the blood 
of Asahel his brother." David mourned sincerely 
the death of Abner. "Know ye not," he addressed 
his servants, "that there is a prince and a great 
man fallen this day in Israel? He followed the 
bier in person. Of the royal lament over Abner 
a fragment is quoted: 

"Should Abner die as a fool dieth 7 
Thy hands were not bound, nor thy feet put Into 

fetters : 
As a man falleth before the children of iniquity, so 
didst thou fall. " 

(See 2 S 3 6-38.) The death of Abner, while it 
thus cannot in any wise be laid at the door of David, 
nevertheless served his purposes well. The back- 
bone of the opposition to David was broken, and be 
was soon proclaimed as king by all Israel. 

Max L. Maeqolis 
ABODE, a-bod'. See Abide. 

ABOLISH, a-bol'ish (Jlfin , hatkath, "to be broken 
down," "made void," "My righteousness shall not 
be aboHshed" [Isa 51 6], i.e. as shown in God's faith- 
fulness to His promises; nnp mdhah, "to erase," 
"blot out," "that your works may be abolished" 
[Ezk 6 6]: KOTapY^d), katarged, "to render in- 
operative,' "bring to nought," "make of no effect," 
"when he shall have abolished all rule" [1 Cor 15 24], 
every power opposed to God's kingdom; "having 
aboMshed in his flesh the enmity" [Eph 2 15]) : By 
His death, Christ did away with the race separa- 
tion due to historic ordinances and ceremonial laws 
(as of circumcision and uncircumcision) ; through 
the cross He wrought the reconciliation, and secured 
that common access to the Father by which the 
union is maintained. 

"Our Saviour Christ Jesus .... abolished 
death" (3 Tim 1 10). Men still die, "it is ap- 
pointed unto men" (He 9 27), but the fear of 
death as having power to terininate or affect our 
personal existence and our union with God, as a 
dreadful stepping out into the unknown and un- 
knowable (into Sheol of the impenetrable gloom), 

and as introducing us to a final and irreversible 
judgment, has been removed. Christ has taken 
out of it its sting (1 Cor 15 55 f) and all its hurt- 
ful power (He 2 14); has shown it to be under His 
control (Rev 1 18), brought to light the incorrupt- 
ible hfe beyond, and declared the ultimate de- 
struction of death (1 Cor 15 26; cf Rev 20 14). 
The Gr (katargeitai) indicates that the process of 
destruction was then going on. M. O. Evans 

ABOMINATION, a-bom-i-na'shun (biag , piggul, 
niyin, to'ebhah, fjitl , shekeg ]J'^fil , shikJcug]): 
Three distinct Heb words are rendered in the Eng- 
lish Bible by "abomination," or "abominable 
thing," referring (except in Gen 43 32; 46 34) 
to things or practices abhorrent to Jehovah, and 
opposed to the ritual or moral requirements of 
His religion. It would be well if these words could 
be distinguished in tr, as they denote different 
degrees of abhorrence or loathsomeness. 

The word most used for this idea by the Hebrews 
and indicating the highest degree of abomination 
is nnyin, to'Sbhah, meaning primarily that which 
offends the religious sense of a people. When it 
is said, for 'example, "The Eg5rptians might not 
eat bread with the Hebrews; for that is an abomi- 
nation unto the Egyptians," this is the word used; 
the significance being that the Hebrews were 
repugnant to the Egyptians as foreigners, as of an 
inferior caste, and especially as shepherds (Gen 
46 34). 

The feeling of the Egyptians for the Greeks was 
likewise one of repugnance. Herodotus (ii.41) 
says the Egyptians would not kiss a Greek on the 
mouth, or use his dish, or taste meat cut with the 
knife of a Greek. 

Among the objects described in the OT as 
"abominations" in this sense are heathen gods, 
such as Ashtoreth (Astarte), Chemosh, Milcom, 
the "abominations" of the Zidonians (Phoenicians), 
Moabites, and Ammonites, respectively (2 K 23 
13), and everything connected with the worship 
of such gods. When Pharaoh, remonstrating 
against the departure of the children . of Israel, 
exhorted them to offer sacrifices to their God in 
Egypt, Moses said: "Shall we sacrifice the abom- 
ination of the Egyptians [i.e. the animals worshipped 
by them which were taboo, to'ebhah, to the Israel- 
ites] before their eyes, and will they not stone us?" 
(Ex 8 26). 

It is to be noted that, not only the heathen idol 
itself, but anything offered to or associated with 
the idol, all the paraphernalia of the forbidden 
cult, was called an "abomination," for it "is an 
abomination to Jeh thy God" (Dt J 25.26). The 
Deuteronomic writer here adds, in terms quite 
significant of the point of view and the spirit of 
the whole law: 'Neither shalt thou bring an 
abomination into thy house and thus become a 
thing set apart [herem = tabooed] like unto it; thou 
shalt utterly detest it and utterly abhor it, for it is 
a thing set apart' {tabooed). To'ebhah is even used 
as synonymous with "idol" or heathen deity, as 
in Isa 44 19; Dt 32 16; 2 K 23 13; and esp. Ex 
8 22 ff. 

Everything akin to magic or divination is like- 
wise an abomination {to^ebhah); as are sexual 
transgressions (Dt 22 5; 23 18; 24 4), esp. incest 
and other unnatural offences: "For all these 
abominations have the men of the land done, 
that were before you" (Lev 18 27; cf Ezk 8 15). 
It is to be noted, however, that the word takes on 
in the later usage a higher ethical and spiritual 
meaning: as where "divers measures, a great and 
a small, "are forbidden (Dt 25 14-16); and in Prov 
where "lying lips" (12 22), "the proud in heart" 




(16 5), "the way of the wicked" (15 9), "evil de- 
vices" (15 26), and "he that justifieth the wicked, 
and he that condemneth the righteous" (17 15), 
are said to be an abomination in God's sight. At 
last prophet and sage are found to unite in declaring 
that any sacrifice, however free from physical 
blemish, if offered without purity of motive, is an 
abomination: 'Bring no more an oblation of false- 
hood — an incense of abomination it is to me' 
(Isa 1 13; of Jer 7 10). "The sacrifice of the 
wicked" and the prayer of him "that turneth away 
his ear from hearing the law," are equally an abomi- 
nation (seeProv 15 8; 21 27; 28 9). 

Another word rendered "abomination" in the AV 
is TB^; shelfeg or f^p'P) shikkus. It expresses 
generally a somewhat less degree of horror or religious 
aversion than to^ebhdh, but sometimes seems to stand 
about on a level with it in meaning. In Dt 14 3, 
for example, we have the command, "Thou shalt 
not eat any abominable thing," as introductory 
to the laws prohibiting the use of the unclean ani- 
mals (see Clean and Unclean Animals), and the 
word there used is to'ebhah. But in Lev 11 10-13.; Isa 66 17; and in Ezk 8 10 shekeg 
is the word used and likewise applied- to the pro- 
hibited animals; as also in Lev 11 43 shekeg is 
used when it is commanded, "Ye shall not make 
yourselves abominable." Then shekeg is often 
used parallel to or together with to^ebhah of that 
which should be held as detestable, as for instance, 
of idols and idolatrous practices (see esp. Dt 29 17; 
Hos 9 10; Jer 4 1; 13 27; 16 18; Ezk 11 18- 
21; 20 7.8). It is used exactly as to'ebhah is used 
as applied to Milcom, the god of the Ammonites, 
which is spoken of as the detestable thing (shekeg) 
of the Ammonites (1 K 11 6). Still even in such 
oases to'ebhah seems to be the stronger word and 
to express that which ia in the highest degree 

The other word used to express a somewhat 
kindred idea of abhorrence and tr^ "abomination" 
in AV is 513S, piggiil; but it is used in the Heb 
Bible only of sacrificial flesh that has become stale, 
putrid, tainted (see Lev 7 18; 19 7; Ezk 4 14; 
Isa 65 4). Driver maintains that it occurs only 
as a "technical term for such state sacrificial 
flesh as has not been eaten within the prescribed 
time," and, accordingly, he would everywhere 
render it specifically "refuse meat." Compare 
lehem m'gho'dl, "the loathsome bread" (from gd'al, 
"to loathe") Mai 1 7. A chief interest in the 
subject for Christians grows out of the use of the 
term in the expression abomination of desolation" 
(Mt 24 15 and Mk 13 14), which see. See also 

LiTEHATTTRE. — Commentators ad loc. Rabbinical lit. in 
point. Driver; Weiss; Gr&tz, Geach. der J uden, IV, n. 15. 

Geo. B. Eager 
"And these ye shall have in abomination among the 
birds; they shall not be eaten, they are an abom- 
ination: the eagle, and the gier-eagle, and the 
ospray, and the kite, and the falcon after its kind, 
every raven after its kind, and the ostrich, and the 
night-hawk, and the sea-mew, and the hawk after 
its kind, and the little owl, and the cormorant, 
and the great owl, and the horned owl, and the 
pelican, and the vulture, and the stork, the heron 
after its kind, and the hoopoe, and the bat." Dt 
14 12-18 gives the glede in addition. 

Each of these birds is treated in order in this 
work. There are two reasons why Moses pro- 
nounced them an abomination for food. Either 
they had rank, offensive, tough flesh, or they were 
connected with religious superstition. The eagle, 
gier-eagle, ospray, kite, glede, falcon, raven, night- 

hawk, sea-mew, hawk, little owl, cormorant, great 
owl, horned owl, peUcan and vulture were offen- 
sive because they were birds of prey or ate carrion 
or fish until their flesh partook of the odor of their 
food. Young ostriches have sweet, tender flesh 
and the eggs are edible also. In putting these 
birds among the abominations Moses must have 
been thinking of grown specimens. (Ostriches 
live to a remarkable age and on account of the dis- 
tances they cover, and their speed in locomotion, 
their muscles become almost as hard as bone.) 
There is a trace of his early Egyp training when he 
placed the stork and the heron on this list. These 
birds, and the crane as well, abounded in all coun- 
tries known at that time and were used for food 
according to the superstitions of different nations. 
These three were closely related to the ibis which 
was sacred in Egypt and it is probable that they 
were protected by Moses for this reason, since they 
were eaten by other nations at that time and cranes 
are used for food today by natives of our south- 
eastern coast states and are to be found in the 
markets of our western coast. The veneration 
for the stork that exists throughout the civihzed 
world today had its origin in Pal. Noting the 
devotion of mated pairs and their tender care for 
the young the Hebrews named the bird h&?ldhah, 
which means kindness. Carried down the history 
of ages with additions by other nations, this un- 
doubtedly accounts for the story now universal, 
that the stork deUvers newly-born children to their 
homes; so the bird is loved and protected. One 
ancient Rom writer, CorneUus Nepos, recorded 
that in his time both crane and storks were eaten; 
storks were liked the better. Later, Pliny wrote 
that no one would touch a stork, but everyone was 
fond of crane. In Thessaly it was a capital crime 
to kill a stork. This change from regarding the 
stork as a deficacy to its protection by a death 
penalty merely indicates the hold the character- 
istics of the bird had taken on people as it became 
better known, and also the spread of the regard in 
which it was held throughout Pal. The hoopoe 
(q.v.) was offensive to Moses on account of ex- 
tremely filthy nesting habits, but was considered 
a great delicacy when captured in migration by 
residents of southern Europe. See also Abomina- 
tion; Birds, Unclean. 

Gene Stratton-Porter 
la'shun: The Heb root for abomination is Y'pl^ , 
shakag, "to be filthy," "to loathe," "to abhor," from 
which is derived yp1!3 or l^lpljj , shijpk^tg, or shikinlg, 
"filthy," esp. "idolatrous." This word is used to de- 
scribe specific forms of idolatrous worship that were 
specially abhorrent, as of the Ammonites (1 K 11 
5.7); of the Moabites (1 K 11 7; 2 K 23 13). 
When Daniel undertook to specify an abomination 
so surpassingly disgusting to the sense of moraUty 
and decency, and so aggressive against everything 
that was godly as to drive all from its presence 
and leave its abode desolate, he chose this as the 
strongest among the several synonyms, adding' 
the qualification "that maketh desolate" (Dnl 11 
31; 12 11), LXX ps^vyiia i/rqiubaewi, bdU-ug-ma 
er-e^mo-se-os. The same noun, though in the plural, 
occurs in Dt 29 17; 2 K 23 24; Isa 66 3; Jer 4 
1; 7 30; 13 27; 32 34; Ezk 20 7.8.30; Dnl 9 
27; Hos 9 10; Zee 9 7. The NT equivalent of 
the noun is pd4\vy/M, bdel-ug^ma = " detestable," 
i.e. (specially) "idolatrous." Alluding to Daniel, 
Christ spoke of the "abomination of desolation" 
(Mt 24 15; Mk 13 14). 

Since the invasion of the Assyrians and Chal- 
daeans, the Jewish people, both of the Northern and 
of the Southern kingdom, had been without political 




independence. From the Chaldaeans the rulership 

of Judaea had been transferred to the Persians, and 

from the Persians, after an interval 

1. The of 200 years, to Alexander the Great. 
Historical From the beginning of the Pers sover- 
Background eignty, the Jews had been permitted 

to organize anew their religious and 
political commonwealth, thus establishing a state 
under the rulership of priests, for the high priest 
was not only the highest functionary of the cult, 
but also the chief magistrate in so far as these 
prerogatives were not exercised by the king of 
the conquering nation. Ezra had given a new 
significance to the tordh by having it read to the 
whole congregation of Israel and by his vigorous 
enforcement of the law of separation from the 
Gentiles. His emphasis of the law introduced 
the period of legalism and finical interpretation 
of the letter which called forth some of the bitterest 
invectives of our Saviour. Specialists of the law 
known as "scribes" devoted themselves to its 
study and subtle interpretation, and the pious 
beheld the highest moral accomphshment in the 
extremely conscientious observance of every pre- 
cept. But in opposition to this class, there were 
those who, influenced by the Hellenistic culture, 
introduced by the conquests of Alexander the 
Great, were inclined to a more "liberal" policy. 
Thus two opposing parties were developed: the 
Hellenistic, and the party of the Pious, or the 
Chasidim, ha^ldhim (Hasidaeans, 1 Mace 2 42; 
7 13), who held fast to the strict ideal of the 
scribes. The former gradually came into ascend- 
ency. Judaea was rapidly becoming Hellenistic in 
all phases of its poUtical, social and religious life, 
and the "Pious" were dwindling to a small minor- 
ity sect. This was the situation when Antiochus 
Epiphanes set out to suppress the last vestige of 
the Jewish cult by the application of brute force. 

Antiochus IV, son of Antiochus the Great, 

became the successor of his brother, Seleucus IV, 

who had been murdered by his min- 

2. Antic- ister, Heliodorus, as king of Syria 
chus (175-164 BC). He was by nature 
Epiphanes a despot; eccentric and unreliable; 

sometimes a spendthrift in his liber- 
ality, fraternizing in an affected manner with those 
of lower station; sometimes cruel and tyrannical, 
as witness his aggressions against Judaea. Polyb- 
ius (26 10) tells us that his eccentric ideas caused 
some to speak of him as a man of pure motive and 
humble character, while others hinted at insanity. 
The epithet Epiphanes is an abbreviation of theds 
epiphants, which is the designation given himself 
by Antiochus on his coins, and means "the god 
who appears or reveals himself." Egyp writers 
translate the inscription, "God which comes forth," 
namely, like the burning sun, Horos, on the hori- 
zon, thus identifying the king with the triumphal, 
appearing god. When Antiochus Epiphanes arose 
to the throne, Onias III, as high priest, was the 
leader of the old orthodox party in Judaea; the head 
of the Hellenists was his own brother Jesus, or, 
as he preferred to designate himself, Jason, this 
being the Gr form of his name and indicating the 
trend of his mind. Jason promised the king large 
sums of money for the transfer of the ofHce of high 
priest from his brother to himself and the privilege 
of erecting a gymnasium and a temple to Phallus, 
and for the granting of the privilege "to enroll the 
inhabitants of Jerusalem as citizens of Antioch." 
Antiochus gladly agreed to everything. Onias 
was removed, Jason became high priest, and hence- 
forth the process of Hellenizing Judaea was pushed 
energetically. The Jewish cult was not attacked, 
but the "legal institutions were set aside, and 
illegal practices were introduced" (2 Mace 4 11). 

A gymnasium was erected outside the castle; the 
youth of Jerusalem exercised themselves in the 
gymnastic art of the Greeks, and even priests left 
their services at the altar to take part in the con- 
test of the palaestra. The disregard of Jewish 
custom went so far that many artificially removed 
the traces of circumcision from their bodies, and 
with characteristic liberality, Jason even sent a 
contribution to the sacrifices in honor of Heracles 
on the occasion of the quadrennial festivities in 

Under these conditions it is not surprising that 
Antiochus should have had both the inclination 
and the courage to undertake the 
3. The total eradication of the Jewish reli- 

Suppression gion and the establishment of Gr 
of the polytheism in its stead. The observ- 

Jewish Cult ance of all Jewish laws, especially 
those relating to the Sabbath and to 
circumcision, were forbidden under pain of death. 
The Jewish cult was set aside, and in all cities of 
Judaea, sacrifices must be brought to the pagan 
deities. Representatives of the crown everywhere 
enforced the edict. Once a month a search was 
instituted, and whoever had secreted a copy of the 
Law or had observed the rite of circumcision was 
condemned to death. In Jerusalem on the 15th 
of Chislev of the year 145 aet Sel, i.e. in December 
168 BC, a pagan altar was built on the Great Altar 
of Burnt Sacrifices, and on the 25th of Chislev, 
sacrifice was brought on this altar for the first 
time (1 Mace 1 54.59). This evidently was the 
"abomination of desolation." The sacrifice, ac- 
cording to 2 Mace was brought to the Olympian 
Zeus, to whom the temple of Jerusalem had been 
dedicated. At the feast of Dionysus, the Jews 
were obliged to march in the Bacchanalian pro- 
cession, crowned with laurel leaves. Christ applies 
the phrase to what was to take place at the advance 
of the Romans against Jerusalem. They who 
would behold the "abomination of desolation" 
standing in the holy place. He bids flee to the 
mountains, which probably refers to the advance 
of the Rom army into the city and temple, carrying 
standards which bore images of the Rom gods and 
were the objects of pagan worship. 

Frank E. Hirsch 

ABOUND, a-bound', ABUNDANCE, a-bun'- 
dans, ABUNDANT, a-bun'dant, -LY, a-bun'dant-li: 
These words represent in the EV a considerable 
variety of different words in the Heb and Gr 
original. In the OT they most frequently stand 
for some form of the stem rabh, signifying "to cast 
together," "to increase." In Prov 8 24 the 
primary idea is "to be heavy" (root kahhadh); 
in Dt 33 19 and Job 22 11 it is "to overflow" 
(shapha^); in Job 36 31 it is "to plait together," 
"to augment," "to multiply" {makhJnr from ka- 
bhar); in Isa 47 9 it is "strength" Coemah); in 

1 K 18 41 it is "tumult," "crowd" {hamon); in 
Eccl 5 12 it is "to fill to satiety" (RV "fulness"); 
in Isa 15 7 it is "excellence" (yithrah) and in 66 11 
"a full breast" (ziz); in Jer 33 6 it is "copious- 
ness" Cdthereth from 'alhar). In several passages 
(e.g. Ezk 16 49; Ps 105 30; Isa 56 12) RV gives 
other and better renderings than AV. In the NT 
perissds, perisseiio, perissela, etc, are the usual 
words for "abundant," "abound," "abundance," 
etc (the adj. signifies "exceeding some number or 
measure"). A slight formal difference of concep- 
tion may be noted in pleondzo, which suggests 
that the abundance has resulted from augmenta- 
tion. In Rom 6 20 the two words stand in the 
closest connection: 'Where sin abounded [by its 
increase] grace abounded more exceedingly [was 
rich beyond measure].' In Mk 12 44; Lk 21 4; 

2 Cor 8 20; 12 7; Rev 18 3 RV gives improved 




renderings instead of "abundance," and in Titus 3 6 
and 2 Pet 111 instead of "abundantly." 

J. R. Van Pelt 
ABOUT, a-bout': The use of this word as prep., 
in the sense of "around," is confined to the OT. 
In the NT, generally an adverb, for Gr ws, hos or 
"hosei." RV adopts it in several idiomatic tr' of 
mello, referring to what is about to be, i.e. on the 
point of occurring, or immediately impending, 
amending AV, in Acts 5 35; 27 2; Rev 12 4, 

ABRAHAM, a'bra-ham: 
I. Name 

1. Various Forms 

2. Etymology 

3. Association 
II. Kindred 

III. Cabeer 

1. Period of Wandering 

2. Period of Residence at Hebron 

3. Period of Residence in the Negeb 

IV. Conditions of Life 

1. Economic Conditions 

2. Social Conditions 

3. Political Conditions 

4. Cultural Conditions 
V^ Character 

1. Religious Beliefs 

2. Morality 

3. Personal Traits 

VI. Significance in the History of Religion 

1. In the OT 

2. In the NT 

3. In Jewish Tradition 

4. In the Koran 

VII. Interpretations of the Story Other Than 

1. The Allegorical Interpretation 

2. The Personification Theory 

3. The Mythical Theory 

4. The "Saga" Theory 

/. Name. — In the OT, when applied to the pa- 
triarch, the name appears as D"73S!>, 'abhram, up 
to Gen 17 5; thereafter always as 
1. Various Dt^^??? , 'abhrdham. Two other per- 
Fonns sons are named DT^?!!? , 'abhlram. The 

identity of this name with 'abhram 
cannot be doubted in view of the variation between 
'dbhiner and 'abhner, 'dbhishalom and 'abhshdlom, 
etc. A. also appears in the list at Karnak of 
places conquered by Sheshonk I: 'Ibrm (no. 72) 
represents D13X, with which Spiegelberg {Aegypt. 
Randglossen zum AT, 14) proposes to connect the 
preceding name (no. 71) p\ hlfr'% , so that the whole 
would read "the field of Abram." Outside of 
Palestine this name (Abiramu) has come to light 
just where from the Biblical tradition we should 
expect to find it, viz., in Babylonia (e.g. in a con- 
tract of the reign of Apil-Sin, second predecessor 
of Hammurabi; also for the aunt (!) of Esarhaddon 
680-669 BC). Ungnad has recently found it, 
among documents from Dilbat dating from the 
Hammurabi dynasty, in the forms A-ba-am-ra-ma, 
A-ba-am-ra-am, as well as A-ba-ra-^ma. 

Until this latest discovery of the apparently full, 
historical form of the Bab equivalent, the best 
that could be done with the etymology 
2. Ety- was to make the first constituent 

mology "father of" (construct -i rather than 

suffix -i), and the second constituent 
"Ram," a proper name or an abbreviation of a 
name. (Yet observe above its use in Assjo-ia for 
a woman; cf Abishag; Abigail). Some were 
inclined rather to concede that the second element 
was a mystery, like the second element in the ma- 
jority of names beginning with 'abh and 'ah, 
"father" and "brother." But the full cuneiform 
writing of the name, with the case-ending am, 
indicates that the noun "father" is in the accusative, 
governed by the verb which furnishes the second 
component, and that this verb therefore is prob- 
ably rdmu ( = Heb Qn"1, raham) "to love," etc; 
so that the name would mean something like "he 

loves the [his] father." (So Ungnad, also Ranke 
in Gressmann's art. "Sage und Geschichte in den 
Patriarchenerzahlungen," ZATW [1910], 3.) Anal- 
ogy proves that this is in the Bab fashion of the 
period, and that judging from the various writings 
of this and similar names, its pronunciation was 
not far from 'abh-ram. 

While the name is thus not "Hebrew" in origin, 
it made itself thoroughly at home among the 
Hebrews, and to their ears conveyed 
3. Associa- associations quite different from its 
tion etymological signification. "Popular 

etymology" here as so often doubtless 
led the Hebrew to hear in 'abh-^am, "exalted father," 
a designation consonant with the patriarch's na- 
tional and rehgious significance. In the form 
'abh-raham his ear caught the echo of some root 
(perhaps r-h-m; cf Arab, ruhdm, "multitude") 
still more suggestive of the patriarch's extensive 
progeny, the reason ("for") that accompanies 
the change of name Gen 17 5 being intended only 
as a verbal echo of the sense in the sound. This 
longer and commoner form is possibly a dialectical 
variation of the shorter form, a variation for which 
there are analogies in comparative Sem grammar. 
It is, however, possible also that the two forms are 
different names, and that 'abh-raham is etymologi- 
cally, and not merely by association of sound, 
"father of a multitude" (as above). (Another 
theory, based on South-Arabic orthography, in 
Hommel, AUisraelitische Ueberlieferung, 177.) 

//. Kindred. — Gen 11 27, which introduces A., 
contains the heading, "These are the generations of 
Terah." AH the story of A. is contained within 
the section of Gen so entitled. Through Terah 
A.'s ancestry is traced back to Shem, and he is 
thus related to Mesopotamian and Arabian fami- 
lies that belonged to the "Semitic" race. He is 
further connected with this race geographically by 
his birthplace, which is given as 'ur-kasdim (see 
Uk), and by the place of his pre-Canaanitish resi- 
dence, Haran in the Aramaean region. The 
purely Sem ancestry of his descendants through 
Isaac is indicated by his marriage with his own 
half-sister (Gen 20 12), and still further empha- 
sized by the choice for his daughter-in-law of 
Rebekah, descended from both of his brothers, 
Nahor and Haran (Gen 11 29; 22 22 f). Both 
the beginning and the end of the residence in Haran 
are left chronologically undetermined, for the 
new beginning of the narrative at Gen 12 1 is not 
intended by the writer to indicate chronological 
sequence, though it has been so understood, e.g. 
by Stephen (Acts 7 4). All that is definite in 
point of time is that an Aramaean period of resi- 
dence intervened between the Bab origin and the 
Palestinian career of A. It is left to a comparison 
of the Bib. data with one another and with the data 
of archaeology, to fix the opening of A.'s career in 
Pal not far from the middle of the 20th cent. BC. 

///. Career. — Briefly summed up, that career 
was as follows. A., endowed with Jeh's promise of 
limitless blessing, leaves Haran with 
1. Period of Lot his nephew and all their establish- 
Wandering ment, and enters Canaan. Successive 
stages of the slow journey southward 
are mdicated by the mention of Shechem, Bethel 
and the Negeb (South-country). Driven by 
famme into Egypt, A. finds hospitable reception, 
though at the price of his wife's honor, whom the 
Pharaoh treats in a manner characteristic of an 
Egyp monarch. (Gressmann, op. cit., quotes from 
Meyer, Geschichte des Alterthums, V, 142, the passage 
from a magic formula in the pyramid of Unas, a 
Pharaoh of the Fifth Dynasty: "Then he [viz. the 
Pharaoh] takes away the wives from their husbands 
whither he will, if desire seize his heart.") Retracing 














the path to Canaan with an augmented train, at 
Bethel A. and Lot find it necessary to part company. 
Lot and his dependents choose for residence the 
great Jordan Depression; A. follows the backbone of 
the land southward to Hebron, where he settles, not 
in the city, but before its gates "by the great trees" 
(LXX sing., "oak") of Mamre. 

Affiliation between A. and the local Amoritish 

chieftains is strengthened by a brief campaign, in 

which all unite their available forces 

2. Period of for the rescue of Lot from an Elamite 
Residence king and his confederates from Baby- 
at Hebron Ionia. The pursuit leads them as far 

as the Lebanon region. On the return 
they are met by Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest 
of 'el '■elyon, and blessed by him in his priestly 
capacity; which A. recognizes by presenting him 
with a tithe of the spoils. A.'s anxiety for a son 
to be the bearer of the divine promises conferred 
upon a "seed" yet unborn should have been 
relieved by the solemn renewal thereof in a formal 
covenant, with precise specifications of God's 
gracious purpose. But human desire cannot wait 
upon divine wisdom, and the Egyp woman Hagar 
bears to A. a son, Ishmael, whose existence from its 
inception proves a source of moral evil within the 
patriarchal household. The sign of circumcision 
and the change of names are given in confirmation 
of the covenant still unrealized, together with 
specification of the time and the person that should 
begin its realization. The theophany that sym- 
bolized outwardly this climax of the Divine favor 
serves also for an intercessory coUoquy, in which A. 
is granted the deliverance of Lot in the impending 
overthrow of Sodom. Lot and his family, saved 
thus by human fidelity and Divine clemency, exhibit 
in the moral traits shown in their escape and sub- 
sequent life the degeneration naturally to be 
expected from their corrupt environment. Moab- 
ites and Ammonites are traced in their origin to 
these cousins of Jacob and Esau. 

Removal to the South-country did not mean 

permanent residence in a single spot, but rather a 

succession of more or less temporary 

3. Period of resting-places. The first of these 
Residence was in the district of Gerar, with 
in the whose king, Abimelech, A. and his 
Negeb wife had an experience similar to the 

earlier one with the Pharaoh. The 
birth of Isaac was followed by the expulsion of 
Ishmael and his mother, and the sealing of peaceful 
relations with the neighbors by covenant at Beer- 
sheba. Even the birth of Isaac, however, did not 
end the discipline of A.'s faith in the promise, for 
a Divine command to sacrifice the life of this son 
was accepted bona fide, and only the sudden inter- 
position of a Divine prohibition prevented its 
obedient execution. The death of Sarah became the 
occasion for A.'s acquisition of the first permanent 
holding of Pal soil, the nucleus of his promised 
inheritance, and at the same time suggested the 
probable approach of his own death. This thought 
led to immediate provision for a future seed to 
inherit through Isaac, a provision realized in 
Isaac's marriage with Rebekah, granddaughter 
of A.'s brother Nahor and of Milcah the sister of 
Lot. But a numerous progeny unassociated with 
the promise grew up in A.'s household, children of 
Keturah, a woman who appears to have had the 
rank of wife after Sarah's death, and of other 
women unnamed, who were his concubines. Though 
this last period was passed in the Negeb, A. was 
interred at Hebron, in his purchased possession, the 
spot with which Sem tradition has continued to 
associate him to this day. 

IV. Conditions of Life. — The life of A. in its 
outward features may be considered under the 

following topics: economic, social, political and 
cultural conditions. 

A.'s manner of life may best be described by the 

adjective "semi-nomadic," and illustrated by the 

somewhat similar conditions prevail- 

1. Economic ing today in those border-communi- 
Conditions ties of the East that fringe the Syrian 

and Arabian deserts. Residence is 
in tents, wealth consists of flocks, herds and slaves, 
and there is no ownership of ground, only at most 
a proprietorship in well or tomb. All this in 
common with the nomad. But there is a relative, 
or rather, intermittent fixity of habitation, unUke 
the pure Bedawi, a limited amount of agriculture, 
and finally a sense of divergence from the Ishmael 
type — all of which tend to assimilate the semi- 
nomadic A. to the fixed Canaanitish population 
about him. As might naturally be expected, such 
a condition is an unstable equilibrium, which tends, 
in the family of A. as in the history of all border- 
tribes of the desert, to settle back one way or the 
other, now into the city-life of Lot, now into the 
desert-life of Ishmael. 

The head of a family, under these conditions, 

becomes at the same time the chief of a tribe, that 

live together under patriarchal rule 

2. Social though they by no means share with- 
Conditions out exception the tie of kinship. The 

family relations depicted in Gen 
conform to and are illuminated by the social 
features of CH. (See K. D. Macmillan, art. "Mar- 
riage among the Early Babylonians and Hebrews," 
Princeton Theol. Review, April, 1908.) There is one 
legal wife, Sarah, who, because persistently child- 
less, obtains the coveted offspring by giving her own 
maid to A. for that purpose (cf CH, §§ 144, 146). 
The son thus borne, Ishmael, is A.'s legal son and 
heir. When Isaac is later borne by Sarah, the 
elder son is disinherited by divine command (Gen 
21 10-12) against A.'s wish which represented 
the prevaiUng law and custom (CH, §§ 168 f). 
The "maid-servants" mentioned in the inventories of 
A.'s wealth (Gen 12 16; 24 35) doubtless furnished 
the "concubines" mentioned in Gen 25 6 as having 
borne sons to him. Both mothers and children were 
slaves, but had the right to freedom, though not 
to inheritance, on the death of the father (CH, 
§ 171). After Sarah's death another woman 
seems to have succeeded to the position of legal 
wife, though if so the sons she bore were disin- 
herited like Ishmael (Gen 26 5). In addition to 
the children so begotten by A. the "men of his 
house" (Gen 17 27) consisted of two classes, the 
"home-born" slaves (Gen 14 14; 17 12 f. 23.27) 
and the "purchased" slaves (ib). The extent of 
the patriarchal tribe may be surmised from the 
number (318) of men among them capable of 
bearing arms, near the beginning of A.'s career, 
yet after his separation from Lot, and recruited 
seemingly from the "home-born" class exclusively 
(Gen 14 14). Over this entire establishment A. 
ruled with a power more, rather than less, absolute 
than that exhibited in detail in the CH: more 
absolute, because A. was independent of any perma- 
nent superior authority, and so combined in his own 
person the powers of the Bab ■paterfamilias and of 
the Can city-king. Social relations outside of the 
family-tribe may best be considered under the next 

It is natural that the chieftain of so considerable 
an organism should appear an attractive ally and 

a formidable foe to any of the smaller 

3. Political political units of his environment. 
Conditions That Canaan was at the time com- 
posed of just such inconsiderable 

units, viz. city-states with petty kings, and 
scattered fragments of older populations, is abun- 




dantly clear from the Biblical tradition and veri- 
fied from other sources. Egypt was the only great 
power with which A. came into poUtical contact 
after leaving the East. In the section of Gen 
which describes this contact with the Pharaoh A. 
is suitably represented as playing no political role, 
but as profiting by his stay in Egypt only through 
an incidental social relation: when this terminates 
he is promptly ejected. The role of conqueror of 
Chedorlaomer, the Elamite invader, would be 
quite out of keeping with A.'s political status else- 
where, if we were compelled by the narrative in 
Gen 14 to suppose a pitched battle between the 
forces' of A. and those of the united Bab armies. 
What that chapter requires is in fact no more than 
a midnight surprise, by A.'s band (including the 
forces of confederate chieftains), of a rear-guard 
or baggage-train of the Babylonians inadequately 
manned and picketed. ("Slaughter" is quite too 
strong a rendering of the original hakkoth, "smiting," 
ver 17.) Respect shown A. by the kings of Salem 
(ver 18), of Sodom (ver 21) and of Gerar (Gen 20 
14-16) was no more than might be expected from 
their relative degrees of political importance, 
although a moral precedence, assumed in the 
tradition, may well have contributed to this 

Recent archaeological research has revolutionized 
our conception of the degree of culture which A. 
could have possessed and therefore 
4. Cultural presumably did possess. The high 
Conditions plane which Hterature had attained 
in both Babylonia and Egypt by 2000 
BC is sufficient witness to the opportunities open 
to the man of birth and wealth in that day for the 
interchange of lofty thought. And, without having 
recourse to A.'s youth in Babylonia, we may assert 
even for the scenes of A.'s maturer life the presence 
of the same culture, on the basis of a variety of 
facts, the testimony of which converges in this 
point, that Canaan in the second millennium BC 
was at the center of the intellectual life of the East 
and cannot have failed to afford, to such of its in- 
habitants as chose to avail themselves of it, every 
opportunity for enjoying the fruits of others' cul- 
ture and for recording the substance of their own 
thoughts, emotions and activities. 

V. Character. — A.'s inward life may be consid- 
ered under the rubrics of reUgion, ethics and per- 
sonal traits. 

The religion of A. centered in his faith in one 
God, who, because believed by him to be possess- 
or of heaven and earth (Gen 14 22; 
1. Religious 24 3), sovereign judge of the nations 
Beliefs (15 14) of all the earth (18 25), dis- 

poser of the forces of Nature (18 14; 
19 24; 20 17 f), exalted (14 22) and eternal (21 33), 
was for A. at least the only God. So far as the 
Biblical tradition goes, A.'s monotheism was not 
aggressive (otherwise in later Jewish tradition), 
and it is theoretically possible to attribute to him 
a merely "monarchical" or "henotheistio" type of 
monotheism, which would admit the coexistence 
with his deity, say, of the "gods which [his] 
fathers served" (Josh 24 14), or the identity with 
his deity of the supreme god of some Canaanite 
neighbor (Gen 14 18). Yet this distinction of 
types of monotheism does not really belong to the 
sphere of religion as such, but rather to that of 
speculative philosophical thought. _ As religion, 
monotheism is just monotheism, and it asserts itself 
in corollaries drawn by the intellect only so far 
as the scope of the monotheist's intellectual life 
appUes it. For A. Jeh not only was alone God; 
He was also his personal God in a closeness of 
fellowship (Gen 24 40; 48 15) that has made him 
for three religions the type of the pious man 

(2 Ch 20 7; Isa 41 8; Jas 2 23 j note the Arab. 
name of Hebron is EJ^Khalil, i.e. the friend 
[viz. of God]). To Jeh A. attributed the moral 
attributes of justice (Gen 18 25), righteousness 
(18 19), faithfulness (24 27), wisdom (20 6), 
goodness (19 19), mercy (20 6). These qualities 
were expected of men, and their contraries in men 
were punished by Jeh (Gen 18 19; 20 11). He 
manifested Himself in dreams (Gen 20 3), visions 
(15 1) and theophanies (18 1), including the voice 
or apparition of the Divine mal'akh or messenger 
("angel") (Gen 16 7; 22 11). On man's part, 
in addition to obedience to Jeh's moral require- 
ments and special commands, the expression of his 
religious nature was expected in sacrifice. This 
bringing of offerings to the deity was dihgently 
practiced by A., as indicated by the mention of his 
erection of an altar at each successive residence. 
Alongside of this act of sacrifice there is sometimes 
mention of a "calling upon the name" of Jeh 
(cf 1 K 18 24; Ps 116 13 f). This pubKcation 
of his faith, doubtless in the presence of Canaanites, 
had its counterpart also in the public regard in 
which he was held as a "prophet" or spokesman for 
God (Gen 20 7). His mediation showed itself 
also in intercessory prayer (Gen 17 20 for Ishmael; 
18 23-32; cf 19 29 for Lot; 20 17 for Abime- 
lech), which was but a phase of his general prac- 
tice of prayer. The usual accompaniment of sac- 
rifice, a professional priesthood, does not occur in 
A.'s family, yet he recognizes priestly prerogative 
in the person of Melchizedek, priest-king of Salem 
(Gen 14 20). Rehgious sanction of course sur- 
rounds the taking of oaths (Gen 14 22; 24 3) 
and the sealing of covenants (21 23). Other cus- 
toms associated with religion are circumcision 
(Gen 17 10-14), given to A. as the sign of the per- 
petual covenant; tithing (14 20), recognized as the 
priest's due; and child-sacrifice (22 2.12), enjoined 
upon A. only to be expressly forbidden, approved 
for its spirit but interdicted in its practice. 

As already indicated, the ethical attributes of 
God were regarded by A. as the ethical require- 
ment of man. This in theory. In 

2. Morality the sphere of applied ethics and 

casuistry A.'s practice, at least, fell 
short of this ideal, even in the few incidents of his 
life preserved to us. It is clear that these lapses 
from virtue were offensive to the moral sense of 
A.'s biographer, but we are left in the dark as to 
A.'s sense of moral obliquity. (The "dust and 
ashes" of Gen 18 27 has no moral implication.) 
The demands of candor and honor are not sat- 
isfactorily met, certainly not in the matter of 
Sarah's relationship to him (Gen 12 11-13; 20 
2; cf 11-13), perhaps not in the matter of Isaac's 
intended sacrifice (22 5.8). To impose our own 
monogamous standard of marriage upon the 
patriarch would be unfair, in view of the different 
standard of his age and land. It is to his credit 
that no such scandals are recorded in his life and 
family as blacken the record of Lot (Gen 19 30- 
38), Reuben (35 22) and Judah (38 15-18). 
Similarly, A.'s story shows only regard for life and 
property, both in respecting the rights of others 
and in expecting the same from them — the antipo- 
des of Ishmael's character (Gen 16 12). 

Outside the bounds of strictly ethical require- 
ment, A.'s personality displayed certain charac- 
teristics that not only mark him out 

3. Personal distinctly among the figures of history. 
Traits but do him great credit as a singularly 

symmetrical and attractive character. 
Of his trust and reverence enough has been said 
under the head of religion. But this love that is 
"the fulfiUing of the law," manifested in such piety 
toward God, showed itself toward men in exceptional 




generosity (Gen 13 9; 14 23; 23 9.13; 24 10; 
25 6), fideUty (14 14.24; 17 18; 18 23-32; 19 
27; 21 11; 23 2), hospitaUty (18 2-8; 21 8) and 
compassion (16 6 and 21 14 when rightly under- 
stood; 18 23-32). A solid self-respect (Gen 14 
23; 16 6; 21 25; 23 9.13.16; 24 4) and real 
courage (14 14-16) were, however, marred by the 
cowardice that sacrificed Sarah to purchase per- 
sonal safety where he had reason to regard Ufe as 
insecure (20 11). 

VI. Significance in the History of Religion. — 
A. is a significant figure throughout the Bible, and 
plays an important r61e in extra-Biblical Jewish 
tradition and in the Mohammedan rehgion. 

It is naturally as progenitor of the people of 

Israel, "the seed of A.," as they are often termed, 

that A. stands out most prominently 

1. In the in the OT books. Sometimes the 
OT contrast between him as an individual 

and his numerous progeny serves to 
point a lesson (Isa 51 2; Ezk 33 24; perhaps Mai 
2 10; cf 15). "The God of A." serves as a designa- 
tion of Jeh from the time of Isaac to the latest period; 
it is by this title that Moses identifies the God who 
has sent him with the ancestral deity of the children 
of Israel (Ex 3 15). Men remembered in those 
later times that this God appeared to A. in the- 
ophany (Ex 6 3), and, when he was still among his 
people who worshipped other gods (Josh 24 3) 
chose him (Neh 9 7), led him, redeemed him 
(Isa 29 22) and made him the recipient of those 
special blessings (Mie 7 20) which were pledged 
by covenant and oath (so every larger historical 
book, also the historical Ps 105 [ver 9]), notably 
the inheritance of the land of Canaan (Dt 6 10). 
Nor was A.'s religious personality forgotten by his 
posterity: he was remembered by them as God's 
friend (2 Ch 20 7; Isa 41 8), His servant, the 
very recollection of whom by God would offset 
the horror with which the sins of his descendants 
inspired Jeh (Dt 9 27). 

When we pass to the NT we are astonished at 
the wealth and variety of allusion to A. As in the 

OT, his position of ancestor lends him 

2. In the much of his significance, not only as 
NT ancestor of Israel (Acts 13 26), but 

specifically as ancestor, now of the 
Levitical priesthood (He 7 5), now of the Mes- 
siah (Mt 11), now, by the peculiarly Christian 
doctrine of the unity of believers in Christ, of 
Cliristian behevers (Gal 3 16.29). All that A. 
the ancestor received through Divine election, by 
the covenant made with him, is inherited by his 
seed and passes under the collective names of the 
promise (Rom 4 13), the blessing (Gal 3 14), 
mercy (Lk 1 54), the oath (Lk 1 73), the cove- 
nant (Acts 3 25). The way in which A. responded 
to this peculiar goodness of God makes him the 
type of the Christian believer. Though so far in 
the past that he was used as a measure of antiquity 
(Jn 8 58), he is declared to have "seen" Messiah's 
"day" (Jn 8 58). It is his faith in the Divine 
promise, which, just because it was for him pecul- 
iarly unsupported by any evidence of the senses, 
becomes the type of the faith that leads to justi- 
fication (Rom 4 3), and therefore in this sense 
again he is the "father" of Christians, as believers 
(Rom 4 11). For that promise to A. was, after 
all, a "preaching beforehand" of the Christian 
gospel, in that it embraced "all the families of the 
earth'' (Gal 3 8). Of this exalted honor, James 
reminds us, A. proved himself worthy, not by an 
inoperative faith, but by "works" that evidenced 
his righteousness (Jas 2 21; cf Jn 8 39). The 
obedience that faith wrought in him is what is 
especially praised by the author of Hebrews (He 
11 8.17). In accordance with this high estimate 

of the patriarch's piety, we read of his eternal 
felicity, not only in the current conceptions of the 
Jews (parable, Lk 16), but also in the express asser- 
tion of Our Lord (Mt 8 11; Lk 13 28). Inci- 
dental historical allusions to the events of A.'s life 
are frequent in the NT, but do not add anything to 
this estimate of his religious significance. 

Outside the Scriptures we have abundant evi- 
dence of the way that A. was regarded by his 
posterity in the Jewish nation. The 

3. In Jew- oldest of these witnesses, Ecclesias- 
ish Tradi- ticus, contains none of the accretions 
tion of the later A.-legends. Its praise 

of A. is confined to the same three 
great facts that appealed to the canonical writers, 
viz. his glory as Israel's ancestor, his election to 
be recipient of the covenant, and his piety (including 
perhaps a tinge of "nomism") even under severe 
testing (Ecclus 44 19-21). The improbable and 
often unworthy and even grotesque features of 
A.'s career and character in the later rabbinical 
midrashim are of no religious significance, beyond 
the evidence they afford of the way A.'s unique posi- 
tion and piety were cherished by the Jews. 

To Mohammed A. is of importance in several 
ways. He is mentioned in no less than 188 verses 

of the Koran, more than any other 

4. In the character except Moses. He is one 
Koran of the series of prophets sent by God. 

He is the common ancestor of the 
Arab and the Jew. He plays the same role of 
religious reformer over against his idolatroiis kins- 
men as Mohammed himself played. He builds 
the first pure temple for God's worship (at Mecca!). 
As in the Bible so in the Koran A. is the recipient 
of the Divine covenant for himself and for his 
posterity, and exhibits in his character the appro- 
priate virtues of one so highly favored: faith, 
righteousness, purity of heart, gratitude, fidehty, 
compassion. He receives marked tokens of the 
Divine favor in the shape of deliverance, guidance, 
visions, angehc messengers (no theophanies for 
Mohammed!), miracles, assurance of resurrection 
and entrance into paradise. He is called "Imam 
of the peoples" (2 118). 

VII. Interpretations of the Story of A. Other 
than the HistoricaL^-There are writers in both 
ancient and modem times who have, from various 
standpoints, interpreted the person and career of 
A. otherwise than as what it purports to be, viz. 
the real experiences of a human person named 
A. These various views may be classified accord- 
ing to the motive or impulse which they believe to 
have led to the creation of this story in the mind of 
its author or authors. 

Philo's tract on A. bears aa alternative titles, 
"On the Life of the Wise Man Made Perfect by 
Instruction, or. On the Unwritten 
1. The Alle- Law." A.'s Kfe is not for him a history 
gorical In- that serves to illustrate these things, 
terpretation but an allegory by which these things 
are embodied. Paul's use of the 
Sarah-Hagar episode in Gal 4 21-31 belongs to 
this type of exposition (cf allegoroiXmena, ver 24), 
of which there are also a few other instances in his 
epistles; yet to infer from this that Paul shared 
Philo's general attitude toward the patriarchal 
narrative would be unwarrantedj since his use of 
this method is incidental, exceptional, and merely 
confirmatory of points already established by sound 
reason. "Luther compares it to a painting which 
decorates a house already built" (Schaff, "Gala- 
tians," Excursus). 

As to Philo A. is the personification of a certain 
type of humanity, so to some modern writers he 
is the personification of the Heb nation or of a 
tribe belonging to the Heb group. This view, 




which is indeed very widely held with respect to 

the patriarchal figures in general, furnishes so many 

more difficulties in its specific appli- 

2. The Per- cation to A. than to the others, that 
soniflcation it has been rejected in A.'s case even 
Theory by some who have adopted it for figures 

like Isaac, Ishmael and Jacob. Thus 
Meyer {Die Israeliten und ihre Nachbarstdmme, 
250; cf also note on p. 251), speaking of his earlier 
opinion, acknowledges that, at the time when he 
"regarded the assertion of Stade as proved that 
Jacob and Isaac were tribes," even then he "still 
recognized A. as a mythical figure and originally a 
god." A similar differentiation of A. from the 
rest is true of most of the other adherents of the 
views about to be mentioned. Hence also Well- 
hausensays (Prolegomena^, 317): "Only A. is cer- 
tainly no naine of a people, like Isaac and Lot; 
he is rather ambiguous anyway. We dare not of 
course on that account hold him in this connection 
as an historical personage; rather than that he 
might be a free creation of unconscious fiction. 
He is probably the youngest figure in this company 
and appears to have been only at a relatively late 
date put before his son Isaac." 

Urged popularly by Noldeke (7m neuen Reich 

[1871], I, 508 ff) and taken up by other scholars, 

especially in the case of A., the view 

3. The gained general currency among those 
Mythical who denied the historicity of Gen, 
Theory that the patriarchs were old deities. 

From this relatively high estate, it 
was held, they had fallen to the plane of mere 
mortals (though with remnants of the hero or even 
demigod here and there visible) on which they 
appear in Gen. A new phase of this mythical 
theory has been developed in the elaboration by 
Winckler and others of their astral-theology of 
the Bab world, in which the worship of A. as the 
moon-god by the Semites of Pal plays a part. A.'s 
traditional origin connects him with Ur and Haran, 
leading centers of the moon-cult. Apart from this 
fact the arguments relied upon to establish this 
identification of A. with Sin may be judged by the 
following samples: "When further the consort of 
A. bears the name Sarah, and one of the women 
among his closest relations the name Milcah, 
this gives food for thought, since these names 
correspond precisely with the titles of the female 
deities worshipped at Haran alongside the moon- 
god Sin. Above aU, however, the number 318, 
that appears in Gen 14 14 in connection with the 
figure of A., is convincing; because this number, 
which surely has no historical value, can only be 
satisfactorily explained from the circle of ideas 
of the moon-reUgion, since in the lunar year of 
354 days there are just 318 days on which the 
moon is visible— deducting 36 days, or three for 
each of the twelve months, on which the moon is 
invisible" (Baentsch, Monotheismus, 60 f). In 
spite of this assurance, however, nothing could 
exceed the scorn with which these combinations 
and conjectures of Winckler, A. Jeremias and others 
of this school are received by those who in fact 
differ from them with respect to A. in httle save 
the answer to the question, what deity was A. 
(see e.g. Meyer, op. cit., 252 f, 256 f). _ 

Gunkel (Genesis, Introduction), in insisting 
upon the resemblance of the patriarchal narrative 

to the "sagas" of other primitive 

4. The peoples, draws attention both to the 
"Saga" human traits of figures like A., and 
Theory to the very early origin of the material 

embodied in our present book of Gen. 
First as stories orally circulated, then as stories 
committed to writing, and finally as a number of 
collections or groups of such stories formed into a 

cycle, the A.-narratives, like the Jacob- and the 
Joseph-narratives, grew through a long and com- 
plex literary history. Gressmann (op. cit., 9-34) 
amends Gunkel's results, in applying to them the 
principles of primitive literary development laid 
down by Professor Wundt in his Volkerpsychologie. 
He holds that the kernel of the A.-narratives is a 
series of fairy-stories, of international diffusion 
and unknown origin, which have been given "a 
local habitation and a name" by attaching to them 
the (ex hypothesi) then common name of A. (simi- 
larly Lot, etc) and associating them with the 
country nearest to the wilderness of Judaea, the 
home of their authors, viz. about Hebron and the 
Dead Sea. A high antiquity (1300-1100 BC) is 
asserted for these stories, their astonishing accuracy 
in details wherever they can be tested by extra- 
Biblical tradition is conceded, as also the proba- 
bility that, "though many riddles stiU remain un- 
solved, yet many other traditions will be cleared 
up by new discoveries" of archaeology. 

J. Oscar Boyd 
ABRAHAM, BOOK OF. See Apocalyptic 

ABRAHAM'S BOSOM, b66z'um(K6\iros 'APpadjji, 
kdlpos Abradm; koXitoi 'A): Figurative. The ex- 
pression occurs in Lk 16 22.23, in the parable of 
the Rich Man and Lazarus, to denote the place of 
repose to which Lazarus was carried after his 
death. The fig. is suggested by the practice of the 
guest at a feast reclining on the breast of his neigh- 
bor. Thus John leaned on the breast of Jesus at 
supper (Jn 21 20). The rabbis divided the state 
after death (Sheol) into a place for the righteous 
and a place for the wicked (see Eschatology op 
OT; Sheol); but it is doubtful whether the fig. 
of Jesus quite corresponds with this idea. "Abra- 
ham's bosom" is not spoken of as in "Hades," but 
rather as distinguished from it (Lk 16 23) — a place 
of blessedness by itself. There Abraham receives, 
as at a feast, the truly faithful, and admits them to 
closest intimacy. It may be regarded as equiva- 
lent to the "Paradise" of Lk 23 43. See Hades; 
Paradise. James Orr 

ABRAM, aTDram. See Abraham. 

ABRECH, a'brek: Transliteration of the Heb 
TfinS , 'abhrehh, in Gen 41 43 RVm, of which both 
the origin and meaning are uncertain. It was the 
salutation which the Egyptians addressed to Joseph, 
when he was made second to Pharaoh, and appeared 
in his official chariot. 

(1) The explanations based upon Heb derivation 
are unsatisfactory, whether as AV "bow the knee," 
from ^11 , barakh (hiph. imp.) or marginal "tender 
father," or "father of a king" of the Tg. The 
form as hiph. imp. instead of tf^TT' , habhrekh, is 
indefensible, while the other two derivations are 

(2) The surmises of Egyptologists are almost 
without number, and none are conclusive. Skinner 
in Comm. on Gen. selects "attention!" after Spie- 
gelberg, as best. Speaker's Comm. suggests "rejoice 
thou" from ab-nek. BDB gives preference to the 
Coptic a-bor-k, "prostrate thyself." 

(3) The most satisfying || is the Assjn- abarakku, 
meaning "grand vizier" or "friend of a king," as 
suggested by Fried. Delitzsch; for Bab laws and 
customs were dominant in western Asia, and the 
Hyksos, through whom such titles would have been 
carried into Egypt, were ruling there at that time. 

Edward Mack 
ABROAD, a-br6d: An idiomatic rendering of 
&(j>UtTo, aphikeio (lit. "arrived"), "come abroad" 
. is used in Rom 16 19 to indicate a report that has 




been most widely diffused (lit. "did reach unto all")- 
Similar idiomatic tr° of AV have been replaced in 
RV by those more literal, as in Mk 4 22; Lk 8 
17; Mk 6 14; 1 Thess 1 8. Used also in other 
idiomatic renderings, as "spread abroad" {diaphe- 
mizo), Mk 1 45; "noised abroad" (dialaUo), Lk 1 
65; "scattered abroad," Jn 11 52; Acts 8 1, etc; 
in all these cases for the pervasive meaning of the 
Gr preposition in composition. In Gen 15 5, hug 
means "outside." H. E. Jacobs 

ABROAD, SCATTERED. See Dispeksion. 

ABRONAH, a-bro'na, AV Ebronah (njhl?, 
'abhronah) : One of the stations of Israel in the 
wilderness on the march from Sinai to Kadesh — 
the station next before that at Ezion-geber on the 
eastern arm of the Red Sea (Nu 33 34.35). 

ABSALOM, ab'sa-lom (OibllJaS, 'abhshalom, 

"father is peace," written also Abishalom, 1 K 

15 2.10): David's third son by 

1. A Gen- Maacah, daughter of Talmai, king 
eral Favor- of Geshur, a small territory between 
ite Hermon and Bashan. Absalom was 

born at Hebron (2833), and moved 
at an early age, with the transfer of the capital, 
to Jerus, where he spent most of his life. He 
was a great favorite of his father and of the people 
as well. His charming manners, his personal 
beauty, his insinuating ways, together with his love 
of pomp and royal pretensions, captivated the 
hearts of the people from the beginning. He lived 
in great style, drove in a magnificent chariot and 
had fifty men run before him. Such magnificence 
produced the desired effect upon the hearts of the 
young aristocrats of the royal city (2 S 15 Iff). 

When Amnon, his half-brother, ravished his sister 

Tamar, and David shut his eyes to the grave 

crime and neglected to administer 

2. In Exile proper punishment, Absalom became 

justly enraged, and quietly nourished 
his anger, but after the lapse of two years carried 
out a successful plan to avenge his sister's wrongs. 
He made a great feast for the king's Sons at Baal- 
hazor, to which, among others, Amnon came, 
only to meet his death at the hands of Absalom's 
servants (13 Iff). To avoid punishment he now 
fled to the court of his maternal grandfather in 
Geshur, where he remained three years, or until 
David, his father, had relented and condoned the 
murderous act of his impetuous, plotting son. At 
the end of three years (13 38) we find Absalom once 
more in Jems. It was, however, two years later be- 
fore he was admitted to the royal presence (14 28). 
Absalom, again reinstated, lost no opportunity 
to regain lost prestige, and having his mind made 

up to succeed his father upon the 

3. Rebels throne, he forgot the son in the poli- 
against His tician. Full of insinuations and rich 
Father in promises, especially to the dis- 
gruntled and to those having griev- 
ances, imaginary or real, it was but natural that he 
should have a following. His purpose was clear, 
namely, to alienate as many as possible from the 
king, and thus neutralize his influence in the selec- 
tion of a successor, for he fully realized that the 
court party, under the influence of Bathsheba, was 
intent upon having Solomon as the next ruler. 
By much flattery Absalom stole the hearts of many- 
men in Israel (15 6). How long a period elapsed 
between his return from Geshur and his open 
rebellion against his father David is a question 
which cannot be answered with any degree of 
certainty. Most authorities regard the forty 
years of 15 7 as an error and following the Syr and 
some editions of the LXX, suggest four as the 

correct text. Whether forty or four, he obtained 
permission from the king to visit Hebron, the 
ancient capital, on pretence of paying a vow made 
by him while at Geshur in case of his safe return 
to Jerus. With two hundred men he repairs to 
Hebron. Previous to the feast spies had been 
sent throughout all the tribes of Israel to stir up 
the discontented and to assemble them under 
Absalom's flag at Hebron. Very large numbers 
obeyed the call, among them Ahithophel, one of 
David's shrewdest counselors (15 7ff). 

Reports of the conspiracy at Hebron soon reached 

the ears of David, who now became thoroughly 

frightened and lost no time in leaving 

4. David's Jerus. Under the protection of his 
Flight most loyal bodyguard he fled to Gilead 

beyond Jordan. David was kindly 
received at Mahanaim, where he remained till 
after the death of his disloyal son. Zadok and 
Abiathar, two leading priests, were intent upon 
sharing the fortunes of David; they went so far 
as to carry the Ark of the Covenant with them 
out of Jerus (15 24). David, however, forced the 
priests and Levites to take it back to its place in 
the city and there remain as its guardians. This 
was a prudent stroke, for these two great priests 
in Jerus acted as intermediaries, and through 
their sons and some influential women kept up 
constant communications with David's army in 
Gilead (15 24 ff) . Hushai, too, was sent back to 
Jerus, where he falsely professed allegiance to Ab- 
salom, who by this time had entered the royal 
city and had assumed control of the government 
(15 32 ff) . Hushai, the priests and a few people 
less conspicuous performed their part well, for the 
counsel of Ahithophel, who advised immedia,te 
action and advance upon the king's forces, while 
everything was in a panic, was thwarted (17 1 ff ) ; 
nay more, spies were constantly kept in contact 
with David's headquarters to inform the king of 
Absalom's plans (17 15 ff). This delay was fatal 
to the rebel son. Had he acted upon the shrewd 
counsel of Ahithophel, David's army might have 
been conquered at the outset. 

When at length Absalom's forces under the 
generalship of Amasa (17 25) reached Gilead, 

ample time had been given to David 

5. Absa- to organize his army, which he divided 
lom's Death into three divisions under the efficient 
and Burial command of three veteran generals: 

Joab, Abishai and Ittai (18 Iff). 
A great battle was fought in the forests of Ephraim. 
Here the rebel army was utterly routed. No 
fewer than 20,000 were killed outright, and a still 
greater number becoming entangled in the thick 
forest, perished that day (18 7f). Among the 
latter was Absalom himself, for while riding upon 
his mule, his head was caught in the boughs of a 
great oak or terebinth, probably in a forked 
branch. "He was taken up between heaven and 
earth; and the mule that was under him went 
on" (18 9). In this position he was found by a 
soldier who at once ran to inform Joab. The 
latter without a moment's hesitation, notwith- 
standing David's positive orders, thrust three 
darts into the heart of Absalom. To make his 
death certain and encouraged by the action of their 
general, ten of Joab's young men "compassed about 
and smote Absalom, and slew him" (18 15). He 
was buried in a great pit, close to the spot where 
he was killed. A great pile of stones was heaped 
over his body (18 17), in accordance with_ the 
custom of dishonoring rebels and great criminals 
by burying them under great piles of stone (Josh 
7 26; 8 29). Thomson informs us that Syrian 
people to this day cast stones upon the graves of 
murderers and outlaws {LB, II, 61). 




The death of Absalom was a source of great 
grief to the fond and aged father, who forgot the 
ruler and the king in the tender- 
6. David's hearted parent. His lament at the 
Lament gate of Mahanaim, though very brief, 
is a classic, and expresses in tender 
language the feelings of parents for wayTvard 
children in all ages of the world (2 S 18 33). 

Little is known of Absalom's family life, but we 
read in 14 27 that he had three sons and one 
daughter. From the language of 18 18, it is 
inferred'that the sons died at an early age. 

Absalom's Tomb: As Absalom had no son to 
perpetuate his memory "he reared up for him- 
self a pillar" or a monument in the King's dale, 
which according to Josephus was two furlongs 
from Jerusalem (Ant, VII, x, 3). Nothing is known 

Absalom's Tomb. 

with certainty about this monument. One of the 
several tombs on the east side of the Kidron passes 
under the name of Absalom's tomb. This fine 
piece of masonry with its graceful cupola and 
Ionic pillars must be of comparatively recent origin, 
probably not earlier than the Rom period. 

W. W. Davies 
ABSALOM (Apoc) (B, 'APeo-o-dXunos, Abes- 
sdlomos and Abessalom; A, Absdlomos; AV Ab- 
salon) : 

(1) Father of Mattathias, a captain of the Jewish 
army (1 Maco 11 70; Ant, XIII, v, 7). 

(2) Father of Jonathan who was sent by Simon 
Maocabee to take possession of Joppa; perhaps 
identical with A (1) (1 Mace 13 11; Ant, XIII, 
vi, 4). 

(3) One of two envoys of the Jews, mentioned in 
a letter sent by Lysias to the Jewish nation (2 Mace 
11 17). 

ABSALON, ab'sa-lon. See Absalom (Apoc). 

ABSOLUTION, ab-so-lu'shun (tr of vbs. Xi5w, 
lilo, "loose," etc, and <l(/>iw, aphiemi, "release," 
"give up," etc): Not a Bit?., but an ecclesiastical 
term, used to designate the official act described in 
Mt 16 19: "Whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, 
shall be loosed in heaven," and Mt 18 18: "What 
things soever ye shall loose," etc, and interpreted by 
Jn 20 23: "Whose soever sins ye forgive, they are 
forgiven unto them" (see Keys, Power of). The 
Roman church regards this as the act of a properly 
ordained priest, by which, in the sacrament of Pen- 

ance, he frees from sin one who has confessed and 
made promise of satisfaction. Protestants regard 
the promise as given not to any order within the 
church, but to the congregation of believers, exercis- 
ing its prerogative through the Christian ministry, 
as its ordinary executive. They differ as to whether 
the act be only declarative or collative. Luther 
regarded it as both declarative and collative, since 
the Word always brings that which it offers. The 
absolution differs from the general promise of the 
gospel by individualizing the promise. What the 
gospel, as read and preached, declares in general, 
the absolution applies personally. See also For- 
giveness. H. E. Jacobs 

ABSTINENCE, abs'ti-nens: Abstinence as a form 
of asceticism reaches back into remote antiquity, 
and is found among most ancient peoples. It may 
be defined as a self-discipline which consists in the 
habitual renunciation, in whole or in part, of the 
enjoyments of the flesh, with a view to the cultiva- 
tion of the life of the spirit. In its extremest forms, 
it bids men to stifle and suppress their physical 
wants, rather than to subordinate them in the 
interest of a higher end or purpose, the underlying 
idea being that the body is the foe of the spirit, 
and that the progressive extirpation of the natural 
desires and inclinations by means of fasting, 
cehbacy, voluntary poverty, etc, is "the way of 

This article will be concerned chiefly with ab- 
stinence from food, as dealt with in the Bible. 
(For other aspects of the subject, see Temperance ; 
Self-denial; Clean; Uncleanness; Meat, etc). 
■Thus limited, abstinence may be either public or 
private, partial or entire. 

Only one such fast is spoken of as having been 

instituted and commanded by the Law of Moses, 

that of the Day of Atonement. This 

1. Public is called "the Fast" in Acts 27 9 

Fasts (cf Ant, XIV, iv, 3; Philo, Vit Mos, 

II, 4; Schurer, HJP, I, i, 322). 

Four annual fasts were later observed by the 
Jews in commemoration of the dark days of Jerus — 
the day of the beginning of Nebuchadrezzar's 
siege in the tenth month, the day of the capture of 
the city in the fourth month, the day of its destruc- 
tion in the fifth month and the day of Gedaliah's 
murder in the seventh month. These are all re- 
ferred to in Zee 8 19. See Fasts. 

It might reasonably be thought that such solemn 
anniversaries, once instituted, would have been kept 
up with sincerity by the Jews, at least for many 
years. But Isaiah illustrates how soon even the 
most outraged feelings of piety or patriotism may 
grow cold and formal. 'Wherefore have we fasted 
and thou seest not?' the exiled Jews cry in their 
captivity. 'We have humbled our souls, and thou 
takest no notice.' Jeh's swift answer follows: 
'Because your fasting is a mere form! Behold, 
in the day of your fast ye find your own pleasure 
and oppress all your laborers' (cf Isa 68 3; Ex- 
positor's Bible, ad loc). That is to say, so formal 
has your fasting grown that your ordinary selfish, 
cruel life goes on just the same. Then Jeh makes 
inquest: "Is such the fast that I have chosen? the 
day for a man to afflict his soul? Is not this the 
fast that I have chosen: to loose the bonds of 
wickedness, to undo the bands of the yoke, and to 
let the oppressed go free, and that ye break every 
yoke? Is it not to deal thy bread to the hungry, 
and that thou bring the poor that are cast out to 
thy house? Then shalt thou call, and Jeh will 
answer; thou shalt cry, and he will say. Here I 
am" (vs 6-9). The passage, as George Adam Smith 
says, fills the earliest, if not the highest place in the 
glorious succession of Scriptures exalting practical 




love, to which belong Isa 61; Mt 26; 1 Cor 13. 
The high import is that in God's view character 
grows rich and life joyful, not by fasts or formal 
observances, but by acts of unselfish service inspired 
by a heart of love. 

These fasts later fell into utter disuse, but they 
were revived after the destruction of Jerus by the 

Occasional public fasts were proclaimed in Israel, 
as among other peoples, in seasons of drought or 
pubUc calamity. It appears according to Jewish 
accounts, that it was customary to hold them on 
the second and fifth days of the week, for the reason 
that Moses was beUeved to have gone up to Mt. 
Sinai on the fifth day of the week (Thursday) and 
to have come down on the second (Monday) 
(cf Did, 8; Apos Const, VIII, 23). 

In addition to these public solemnities, indi- 
viduals were in the habit of imposing extra fasts 
upon themselves (e.g. Jth 8 6; Lk 2 

2. Private 37); and there were some among the 
Fasts Pharisees who fasted on the second 

and fifth days of the week all the 
year round (Lk 18 12; see Lightfoot, ad loc). 

Tacitus alludes to the "frequent fasts" of the 
Jews {History, V, 4), and Jos tells of the spread of 
fasting among the Gentiles {CAp, II, 40; cf Ter- 
tulUan, ad Nat, i.13). There is abundant evidence 
that many religious teachers laid down rules con- 
cerning fasting for their disciples (cf Mk 2 18: Mt 
9 14; Lk 6 33). 

Individuals and sects differ greatly in the degrees 

of strictness with which they observe fasts. In 

some fasts among the Jews abstinence 

3. Degrees from food and drink was observed 
of Strict- simply from sunrise to sunset, and 
ness in washing and anointing were permitted. 
Abstinence In others of a stricter sort, the fast 

lasted from one sunset till the stars 
appeared after the next, and, not ohly food and 
drink, but washing, anointing, and every kind of 
agreeable activity and even salutations, were pro- 
hibited (Schurer; II, ii, 119; Edersheim, Ldfe and 
Times, I, 663). Such fasting was generally prac- 
tised in the most austere and ostentatious manner, 
and, among the Pharisees, formed a part of their 
most pretentious extemalism. On this point the 
testimony of Mt 6 16 is confirmed by the Mish. 

There arose among the Jews various kinds of 
ascetics and they may be roughly divided into 

three classes. 

4. Absti- (1) The Essenes. — These lived to- 
nence gether in colonies, shared all things 
among in common and practised volimtary 
Different poverty. The stricter among them 
Kinds of also eschewed marriage. They were 
Ascetics indifferent, Philo says, alike to money, 

pleasure, and worldly position. They 
ate no animal flesh, drank no wine, and used no oil 
for anointing. The objects of sense were to them 
"unholy," and to gratify the natural craving was 
"sin." They do not seem to come distinctly into 
view in the NT. See Essenes. 

(2) The hermit ascetics. — ^These fled away from 
human society with its temptations and allure- 
ments into the wilderness, and lived there a life of 
rigid self-discipline. Jos (Vita, 2) gives us a notable 
example of this class in Banus, who "lived in the 
desert, clothed himself with the leaves of trees, 
ate nothing save the natural produce of the soil, 
and bathed day and night in cold water for purity's 
sake." John the Baptist was a hermit of an en- 
tirely different type. He also dwelt in the desert, 
wore a rough garment of camel's hair and subsisted 
on "locusts and wild honey." But his asceticism 
was rather an incident of his environment and 
vocation than an end in itself (see "Asceticism," 

DCG). In the fragments of his sermons which 
are preserved in the Gospels there is no trace of any 
exhortation to ascetic exercises, though John's 
disciples practised fasting (Mk 2 18). 

_ (3) The moderate ascetics. — There were many 
pious Jews, men and women, who practised asceti- 
cism of a less formal kind. The asceticism of the 
Pharisees was of a kind which naturally resulted 
from their legal and ceremonial conception of 
religion. It expressed itself chiefly, as we have 
seen, in ostentatious fasting and externalism. But 
there were not a few humble, devout souls in Israel 
who, like Anna, the prophetess, served God "with 
fastings and suppUcations night and day" (Lk 2 
37), seeking by a true self-discipline to draw near 
unto God (of Acts 13 2.3; 14 23; 1 Tim 5 5). 

Some of the rabbis roundly condemned abstinence, 

or asceticism in any form, as a principle of life. 

"Why must the Nazirite bring a sin 

5. Absti- offering at the end of his term?" 
nence as (Nu 6 13.14) asks Eliezer ha-Kappar 
Viewed in (Siphra', ad loc); and gives answer, 
the Talmud "Because he sinned against his own 

person by his vow of abstaining from 
wine"; and he concludes, "Whoever undergoes fast- 
ing or other penances for no special reason commits 
a wrong." "Man in the life to come will have to 
account for every enjoyment offered him that was 
refused without sufficient cause" (Rabh, in Yer. 
Kid., 4). In Maimonides {Ha-Yadh ha-H&zalgah, 
De'oth 3 1) the monastic principle of abstinence in 
regard to marriage, .eating meat, or drinking wine, 
or in regard to any other personal enjoyment or 
comfort, is condemned as "contrary to the spirit of 
Judaism," and "the golden middle-way of modera- 
tion" is advocated. 

But, on the other hand, abstinence is often con- 
sidered by the rabbis meritorious and praiseworthy 
as a voluntary means of self -discipline. "I par- 
took of a Nazirite meal only once," says Simon the 
Just, "when I met with a handsome youth from the 
south who had taken a vow. When I asked the 
reason he said: 'I saw the Evil Spirit pursue me as 
I beheld my face reflected in water, and I swore 
that these long curls shall be cut off and offered 
as a sacrifice to Jeh' ; whereupon I kissed him upon 
his forehead and blessed him, saying. May there 
be many Nazirites like thee in Israel!" {Nazir, 46). 
"Be holy" was accordingly interpreted, "Exercise 
abstinence in order to arrive at purity and holi- 
ness" ('Ah. Zarah, 206; Siphra', K'^dhoshlm). "Ab- 
stain from everything evil and from whatever is like 
unto it" is a rule found in the Talm {Hullin, 446), 
as also in the Did (3 1) — a saying evidently based 
on Job 31 1, "Abstain from the lusts of the flesh 
and the world." The Mosaic laws concerning diet 
are all said by Rabh to be "for the purification of 
Israel" (Lev R. 13) — "to train the Jew in self- 

The question of crowning interest and significance 
to us is. What attitude did Jesus take toward fast- 
ing, or asceticism? The answer is to 

6. The At- be sought in the light, first of His prac- 
titude of tice, and, secondly, of His teaching. 
Jesus to (1) His practice. — Jesus has even 
Fasting been accounted "the Founder and 

Example of the ascetic life" (Clem. 
Alex., Strom, III, 6). By questionable emphasis 
upon His "forty days' " fast. His abstinence from 
marriage and His voluntary poverty, some have 
reached the conclusion that complete renunciation 
of the things of the present was "the way of per- 
fection according to the Saviour." 

A fuller and more appreciative study of Jesus' 
life and spirit must bring us to a different conclu- 
sion. Certainly His mode of life is sharply differ- 
entiated in the Gospels, not only from that of the 




Pharisees, but also from that of John the Baptist. 
Indeed, He exhibited nothing of the asceticism of 
those illustrious Christian saints, St. Bernard and 
St. John of the Cross, or even of St. Francis, who 
"of all ascetics approached most nearly to the 
spirit of the Master." Jesus did not flee from the 
world, or eschew the amenities of social life. He 
contributed to the joyousness of a marriage feast, 
accepted the hospitality of rich and poor, permitted 
a vase of very precious ointment to be broken and 
poured upon His feet, welcomed the society of 
women, showed tender love to children, and clearly 
enjoyed the domestic Ufe of the home in Bethany. 
There is no evidence that He imposed upon Him- 
self any unnecessary austerities. The "forty days' " 
fast (not mentioned in Mk, the oldest authority) 
is not an exception to this rule, as it was rather a 
necessity imposed by His situation in the wilder- 
ness than a self-imposed observance of a law of 
fasting (of Christ's words concerning John the 
Baptist: "John came neither eating nor drinking"; 
see the article on "Asceticism," DCG). At any 
rate. He is not here an example of the traditional 
asceticism. He stands forth tlu-oughout the Gospels 
"as the living type and embodiment of self-denial," 
yet the marks of the ascetic are not found in Him. 
His mode of life was, indeed, so unascetic as to 
bring upon Him the reproach of being "a gluttonous 
man and a winebibber" (Mt 11 19; Lk 7 34). 

(2) His teaching. — Beyond question, it was, from 
first to last, "instinct with the spirit of self- 
denial." "If any man will come after me, let him 
deny himself," is an ever-recurring refrain of His 
teaching. "Seek ye first the kingdom of God," is 
ever His categorical imperative (Mt 6 33 AV; Lk 
12 31). This is to Him the summum bonum — all 
desires and strivings which have not this as their 
goal must be suppressed or sacrificed (cf Mt 13 
44-46; 19 21; Mk 10 21; Lk 9 59.60; 14 26 
with Mt 5 29.30; Mk 9 43-47; Mt 16 24 f ; 
Mk 8 34 f; Lk 9 23 f; and 14 33). In short, if 
any man find that the gratification of any desire 
of the higher or lower self will impede or distract 
him in the performance of his duties as a subject 
of the Kingdom, he must forego such gratification, 
if he would be a disciple of Christ. "If it cause 
thee to stumble," is always the condition, implied 
or expressed, which justifies abstinence from any 
particular good. 

According to the record, Jesus alluded to fasting 
only twice in His teaching. In Mt 6 16-18, 
where voluntary fasting is presupposed as a reh- 
gious exercise of His disciples, He warns them 
against making it the occasion of a parade of piety: 
"Thou, when thou fastest, anoint thy head, and 
wash thy face; that thou be not seen of men to 
fast, but of thy Father who is in secret." In 
short. He sanctions fasting only as a genuine ex- 
pression of a devout and contrite frame of mind. 

In Mt 9 14-17 (l[Mk 2 18-22; Lk 5 33-39) 
in reply to the question of the disciples of John 
and of the Pharisees, Jesus refuses to enjoin fast- 
ing. He says fasting, as a recognized sign of 
mourning, would be inconsistent with the joy 
which "the sons of the bridechamber" naturally 
feel while "the bridegroom is with them." But, 
he adds, suggesting the true reason for fasting, that 
the days of bereavement will come, and then the 
outward expression of sorrow will be appropriate. 
Here, as in the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus sanc- 
tions fasting, without enjoining it, as a form through 
which emotion may spontaneously seek expression. 
His teaching on the subject may be summarized 
in the one word, subordination (DCG). 

To the form of fasting He attaches little impor- 
tance, as is seen in the succeeding parables of the 
Old Garment and the Old Wine-skins. It will not 

do. He says, to graft the new liberty of the gospel on 
the body of old observances, and, yet more, to try 
to force the new system of life into the ancient 
molds. The new piety must manifest itself in new 
forms of its own making (Mt 9 16.17; Mk 2 21. 
22; Lk 5 36.38). Yet Jesus shows sympathy with 
the prejudices of the conservatives who cling to 
the customs of their fathers: "No man having 
drunk old wine desireth new; for he saith. The 
old is good." But to the question, Was Jesus an 
ascetic? we are bound to reply. No. 

"Asceticism," as Harnack says, "has no place 
in the gospel at all; what it asks is that we should 
struggle against Mammon, against care, against 
selfishness; what it demands and disengages is 
love — -the love that serves and is self-sacrificing; 
and whoever encumbers Jesus' message with any 
other kind of asceticism fails to understand it" 
{What is Christianity? 88). 

On the whole, unquestionably, the practice and 
teachings of the apostles and early Christians were 
in harmony with the example and 
7. The teaching of the Master. But a tend- 

Practice ency, partly innate, partly trans- 
and Teach- mitted from Jewish legalism, and 
ing of the partly pagan, showed itself among 
Apostles their successors and gave rise to the 
Vita Religiosa and Dualism which 
found their fullest expression in Monasticism. 

It is worthy of note that the alleged words of 
Jesus : 'But this kind goeth not out save by prayer 
and fasting' (Mk 9 29; Mt 17 21 AV), are cor- 
ruptions of the text. (Cf Tob 12 8; Su- 34 26; 
Lk 2 37) . The Oxyrhynchus fragment (disc. 1897) 
contains a logion with the words Ugei lesoils, edn 
me nesteuete tdn kdsmon, ou mt heurete tin basilei- 
an tou theou: "Jesus saith. Except ye fast to the 
world, ye shall in no wise find the Kingdom of 
God," but the "fasting" here is clearly meta- 

LiTEKATUBE. — ^Bingham, Antiquities; W. Bright, Some 
Aspects of Primitive Church Life (1898J; J. O. Hannay, 
The Spirit and Origin of Christian Monasticism (1902), 
and The Wisdom of the Desert (1904); Thomas a Kempis, 
Imitation of Christ; Migne, Dictionnaire d^ AscMisme, and 
Enc Theol., XLV, XLVI, 45. 46; Jew Enc, and Bible 
Dictionaries ad loc. 

Geo. B. Eager 
ABUBtrS, a-bu'bus ("ApovPos, Aboubos): The 
father of Ptolemy, who deceitfully slew Simon 
Maccabee and his sons at Dok near Jericho (1 Mace 
16 11.15). 

a-bun'dant. See ABOtrND. 

ABUSE, a-buz': "To dishonor," "to make mock 
of," "to insult," etc. (1) Tr-i in the OT from bby, 
'alal, "to do harm," "to defile" (Jgs 19 25), "to 
make mock of" (1 S 31 4). (2) Tr"" in the NT 
from (ip(7ej'OKo(T7)s, arsenokoites, lit. "one who lies 
with a male," "a sodomite" (1 Cor 6 9; 1 Tim 
1 10; AV "for them that defile themselves with 
mankind"). (3) In AV 1 Cor 7 31 "as not 
abusing it," from KaTaxpioimt, katachrdomai, "to 
abuse," i.e. misuse; RV "using it to the full," also 
1 Cor 9 18. See Use. 

ABYSS, a-bis', THE (tj aPu<ro-os, he 

In classical Gr the word is always an adj., and is 
used (l)lit. "very deep," "bottomless"; (2) fig. "un- 
fathomable," "boundless." "Abyss" does not occur 
in the AV but the RV so transliterates dt/Suo-o-os in 
each case. The AV renders the Gr by "the deep" in 
two passages (Lk 8 31; Rom 10 7). In Rev the 
AV renders by "the bottomless pit" (9 1.2.11; 11 7; 
17 8; 20 1.3). In the.LXX abussos is the render- 
ing of the Heb word DinW (t'hom). According to 




primitive Sem cosmogony the earth was supposed 
to rest on a vast body of water which was the 
source of all springs of water and rivers (Gen 1 2; 
Dt 8 7; Ps 24 2; 136 6). This subterranean 
ocean is sometimes described as "the water under 
the earth" (Ex 20 4; Dt 5 8). According to 
Job 41 32 t^hom is the home of the leviathan in 
which he ploughs his hoary path of foam. The 
LXX never uses abussos as a rendering of biSTS , 
sh''dl {=Sheol= Hades) and probably f'hdm never 
meant the "abode of the dead" which was the or- 
dinary meaning of Sheol. In Ps 71 20 l^hom is 
used fig., and denotes "many and sore troubles" 
through which the psalmist has passed (cf Jon 2 
5). But in the NT the word abussos means the 
"abode of demons." In Lk 8 31 the AV renders 
"into the deep" (Weymouth and The Twentieth 
Century NT ="into the bottomless pit"). The 
demons do not wish to be sent to their place of 
punishment before their destined time. Mk 
simply says "out of the country" (5 10). In 
Rom 10 7 the word is equivalent to Hades, the 
abode of the dead. In Rev (where the AV renders 
invariably "the bottomless pit") abussos denotes 
the abode of evil spirits, but not the place of final 
punishment; it is therefore to be distinguished from 
the "lake of fire and brimstone" where the beast 
and the false prophet are, and into which the Devil 
is to be finally cast (19 20; 20 10). See also 
Astronomy, III, 7. Thomas Lewis 

ABYSSINIA, ab-i-sin'i-a. See Ethiopia. 

ACACIA, a-ka'sha (ni3115, shittah, the shittah 
tree of AV, Isa 41 19, and nEJia""!?^ , 'Hge-shittah, 
acacia wood; shittah wood AV, Ex 25 5.10.13; 
26 15.26; 27 1.6; Dt 10 3.): Shittah { = shintah) 
is equivalent to 
the Arab, sant 
which is now the 
name of the Aca- 
cia Nilotica (NO, 
but no doubt the 
name once in- 
cluded other 
species of desert 
acacias. If one 
particular spe- 
cies is indicated 
in the OT it is 
probably the 
Acacia Seyal — 
the Arab. Seyyal 
— which yields 
the well-known 
gum-arabic. This 
tree, which has 
finely bipinnate 
leaves and glob- 
ular flowers, 
grows to a height 
of twenty feet or 
more, and its 
stem may some- 
times reach two 
feet in thickness. . . ... 

The tree often assumes a characteristic umbrella-like 
form. The wood is close-grained and is not readily 
attacked by insects. It would be well suited tor 
such purposes as described, the construction ot the 
ark of the covenant, the altar and boarding ot the 
tabernacle. Even today these trees survive in con- 
siderable numbers around "Aira Jidy and in the val- 
leys to the south. E. W. G. Mastehman 

ACATAN, ak'a-tan. See Akatan (Apoc). 

Shittlm Wood— Acacia Seyal. 

ACCABA, ak'a-ba, ak-a'ba (B, 'AkkoP4, Akkabd; 
A, Topa, Gabd; AV Agaba) = Hagab (Ezr 2 46); 
see also Hagaba (Neh 7 48) : The descendants of 
A. (temple-servants) returned with Zerubbabel to 
Jerus (1 Esd 5 30). 

ACCAD, ak'ad, ACCADIANS, ak-a'di-ans. See 

ACCARON, ak'a-ron ('AKKapwv, Akkardn): 
Mentioned in 1 Mace 10 89 AV; a town of the 
Philistines, known as Ekron Cjllpy , 'elpron) in OT, 
which King Alexander gave to Jonathan Maoca- 
baeus as a reward for successful military service 
in western Pal. It is also mentioned in the days 
of the Crusades. See Ekeon. 

ACCEPT, ak-sept', ACCEPTABLE, ak-sep'ta-b'l, 
ACCEPTATIO N, ak-sep-ta'-shun : ' 'To receive with 
favor," "to take pleasure in"; "well-pleasing"; 
"the act of receiving." 

Accept, used (1) of sacrifice, "a. thy burnt- 
sacrifice" CjlB'^ , ddshen, "accept as fat," i.e. receive 
favorably; Ps' 20 3); (2) of persons, "Jeh a. Job" 
(Job 42 9, Sip5, nasa', "to lift up," "take," "re- 
ceive"); (3) of works, "a. the work of his hands" 
(Dt 33 11 niyn, rasah, "to delight in"). In NT 
(1) of favors', '"We a with all thankful- 
ness" {&-n-oS4xoimt, apod4chomai. Acts 24 3); (2) of 
personal appeal, "He a. our exhortation" (2 Cor 
8 17) ; (3) of God's impartiality (\aiJ.pdvoi, lambdno, 
"to take," "receive"); "acoepteth not man's per- 
son" (Gal 2 6). 

Acceptable, used (1) of justice (Tia, bahar, 

"choose, select"), "more a than sacrifice" 

(Prov 21 3) ; (2) of words (f Sn , hephee, "delight 
in," "sought .... a. words" (Eocl 12 10); (3) of 
times (liST, ragon, "delight," "approbation"; 
Se/cris, dektds, "receivable") "a. year of the Lord" 
(Isa 61 2 [AV] ; Lk 4 19) ; (4) of spiritual sacrifice 
(efiTrpSo-SeKTos, euprdsdektos, "well received"), "a. to 
God" (1 Pet 2 5); (5) of patient endurance (xi^P", 
chdris, "grace," "favor") "This is a. with God" (1 
Pet 2 20). 

Acceptation, used twice to indicate the trust- 
worthiness of the gospel of Christ's saving grace: 
"worthy of aU a." (1 Tim 1 15; 4 9). 

These words are full of the abundant grace of 
God and are rich in comfort to believers. That 
which makes man, in word, work and character, 
acceptable to God; and renders it possible for God 
to accept him, his service and sacrifice, is the ful- 
ness of the Divine mercy and grace and forgive- 
ness. He "chose us" and made us, as adopted 
sons, the heirs of His grace "which he freely be- 
stowed on us in the Beloved" (Eph 1 6; cf AV). 
DwiGHT M. Pratt 

ACCEPTANCE, ak-sep'-tans: A rendering of 
the Heb "fiT), r'gon, "deUght," found only in Isa 
60 7. It pictures God's delight in His redeemed 
people in the Messianic era, when their gifts, in ■ 
joyful and profuse abundance, "shall come up with 
acceptance on mine altar." With "accepted" and 
other kindred words it implies redeeming grace as 
the basis of Divine favor. It is the "living, holy 
sacrifice" that is "acceptable to God" (Rom 12 1; 
cf Titus 3 4-6). 

ACCESS, ak'ses (irpotraYu-y^i, prosagogt, "a lead- 
ing to or toward," "approach"): Thrice used in 
the NT to indicate the acceptable way of ap- 
proach to God and of admission to His favor. 
Jesus said, "I am the way" (Jn 14 6). His blood 
is the "new and living way" (He 10 20). Only 
through Him have we "a. by faith into this grace 



wherein we stand" (Rom 5 2); "Through him we 
both have a. by one Spirit unto the Father" 
(Eph 2 18 AV); "in whom we have .... a. in 
confidence, through our faith in him" (Eph 3 12). 
The goal of redemption is life in God, "unto the 
Father." The means of redemption is the cross of 
Christ, "in whom we have our redemption through 
his blood" (Eph 1 7). The agent in redemption is 
the Holy Spirit, "by one Spirit," "sealed with the 
Holy Spirit of promise" (Eph 1 13). The human 
instrumentality, faith. The whole process of 
approach to, and abiding fellowship with, God is 
summed up in this brief sentence: Access to the 
Father, through Christ, by the Spirit, by faith. 
DwiGHT M. Pratt 

ACCO, ak^o (13?, 'akko; 'Akxw, Akcho; "Akt] 
IlToXc|jia'Cs, Ake Ptolemals; Modern Arab. 'Akka^ 
Eng. Acre; AV Accho)-: A town on the Syrian 
coast a few miles north of Carmel, on a small 
promontory on the north side of a broad bay that 
lies between it and the modern town of Haifa. 
This bay furnishes the best anchorage for ships of 
any on this coast except that of St. George, at 
Beirtit, and Alexandretta at the extreme north. 
As the situation commanded the approach from the 
sea to the rich plain of Esdraelon and also the 
coast route from the north, the city was regarded 
in ancient times of great importance and at various 
periods of history was the scene of severe struggles 
for its possession. It fell within the bounds 
assigned to the Israelites, particularly to the tribe 
of Asher, but they were never able to take it (Josh 
19 24-31; Jgs 1 31). It was, like Tyre and Sidon, 
too strong for them to attack and it became indeed 
a fortress of unusual strength, so that it withstood 
many a siege, often baflSing its assailants. In the 
period of the Crusades it was the most famous 
stronghold on the coast, and in very early times it 
was a place of importance and appears in the Am 
Tab as a possession of the Egyp kings. Its gov- 
ernor wrote to his suzerain professing loyalty when 
the northern towns were falling away (Ain Tab 
17 BM, 95 B). The Egyp suzerainty over the 
coast, which was estabhshed by Thothmes III 
about 1480 BC, was apparently lost in the 14th 
cent., as is indicated in Am Tab, but was regained 
under Seti I and his more famous son Rameses 
II in the 13th, to be again lost in the 12th when 
the Phoen towns seem to have established their 
independence. Sidon however surpassed her sisters 
in power and exercised a sort of hegemony over 
the Phoen towns, at least in the south, and 
A. was included in it (Rawl. Phoenicia, 407-8). 
But when Assyria came upon the scene it had to 
submit to this power, although it revolted when- 
ever Assyria became weak, as appears from the 
mention of its subjugation by Sennacherib (ib 449), 
and by Asshur-bani-pal (ib 458). The latter 
"quieted" it by a wholesale massacre and then 
carried into captivity the remaining inhabitants. 
Upon the downfall of Assjrria it passed, together 
with other Phoen towns, under the dominion of 
Babylon and then of Persia, but we have no records 
of its annals during that period; but it followed the 
fortunes of the more important cities, Tyre and 
Sidon. In the Seleucid period (BC 312-65) the 
town became of importance in the contests between 
the Seleucids and the Ptolemies. The latter 
occupied it during the struggles that succeeded 
the death of Alexander and made it their stronghold 
on the coast and changed the name to Ptolemais, 
by which it was known in the Gr and Rom period 
as we see in the accounts of the Gr and Rom writers 
and in Jos, as well as in NT (1 Mace 5 22; 10 
39; 12 48; Acts 21 7). The old name still con- 
tinued locally and reasserted itself in later times. 

The Ptolemies held undisputed possession of the 
place for about 70 years but it was wrested from 
them by Antiochus III, of Syria, in 219 BC and 
went into the permanent possession of the Seleucids 
after the decisive victory of Antiochus over Scopas 
in that year, the result of which was the expulsion 
of the Ptolemies from Syria, Pal and Phoenicia 
(Ant, XII, iii, 3). In the dynastic struggles of the 
Seleucids it fell into the hands of Alexander Bala, 
who there received the hand of Cleopatra, the 
daughter of Ptolemy Philometor, as a pledge of 
alliance between therh (ib XIII, iv, 1). Tigranes, 
king of Armenia, besieged it on his invasion of 
Syria, but was obliged to relinquish it on the ap- 
proach of the Romans toward his own dominions 
( BJ, I, V, 3) . Under the Romans Ptolemais became 
a colony and a metropolis, as is known from its 
coins, and was of importance, as is attested by 
Strabo. But the events that followed the con- 
quests of the Saracens, leading to the Crusades, 
brought it into great prominence. It was cap- 
tured by the Crusaders in 1110 AD, and remained 
in their hands until 1187, when it was taken from 
them by Saladin and its fortifications so strength- 
ened as to render it almost impregnable. The 
importance of this fortress as a key to the Holy 
Land was considered so great by the Crusaders 
that they put forth every effort during two years to 
recapture it, but all in vain until the arrival of 
Richard Coeur de Lion and Philip Augustus with 
reinforcements, and it was only after the most 
strenuous efforts on their part that the place fell 
into their hands; but it cost them 100,000 men. 
The fortifications were repaired and it was after- 
ward committed to the charge of the knights of 
St. John, by whom it was held for 100 years and 
received the name of St. Jean d' Acre. It was finally 
taken by the Saracens in 1291, being the last place 
held by the Crusaders in Pal. 

It declined after this and fell into the hands of 
the Ottomans under Selim I in 1516, and re- 
mained mostly in ruins until the 18th cent., when 
it came into the possession of Jezzar Pasha, who 
usurped the authority over it and the neighboring 
district and became practically independent of 
the Sultan and defied his authority. In 1799 it 
was attacked by Napoleon but was bravely and 
successfully defended by the Turks with the help 
of the English fleet, and Napoleon had to abandon 
the siege after he had spent two months before it 
and gained a victory over the Turkish army at 
Tabor. It enjoyed a considerable degree of pros- 

Eerity after this until 1831 when it was besieged 
y Ibrahim Pasha, of Egypt, and taken, but only 
after a siege of more than five months in which it 
suffered the destruction of its walls and many of 
its buildings. It continued in the hands of the 
Egyptians until 1840 when it was restored to the 
Ottomans by the Enghsh whose fleet nearly reduced 
it to ruins in the bombardment. It has recovered 
somewhat since then and is now a town of some 
10,000 inhabitants and the seat of a Mutasarrifiyet, 
or_ subdivision of the Vilayet of Beirdt. It con- 
tains one of the state prisons of the Vilayet, where 
long-term prisoners are incarcerated. Its former 
commerce has been almost wholly lost to the town 
of Haifa, on the south side of the bay, since the 
latter has a fairly good roadstead, while Acre has 
none, and the former being the terminus of the 
railway which connects with the interior and the 
Damascus-Mecca line, it has naturally supplanted 
Acre as a center of trade. H. Porter 

ACCOMMODATION, a-kom-mo-da'shun : 


1. Three Uses of the Term 

2. The Importance ol the Subject 




II. Accommodated Application of Scbiptube Pas- 

1. Interpretation a Science 

2. Scientific Accommodation 

III. Double Refebence in Scbiptube 

1. Allegory in Scripture 

2. Hidden Truths ol Scripture 

3. Prophecy and Its Fulfllment 

4. Conclusion 

IV. Accommodation in Revelation 
1. General Principles 

2.»> Accommodation a Feature of Progressive Reve- 

3. The Limits ol Revelation 

4. The Outcome of Revelation 

5. The Question as to Christ's Method 


/. Introductory. — The term "accommodation" is 
used in three senses which demand careful discrim- 
ination and are worthy of separate 

1. Three treatment: (1) the use or application 
Uses of the of a Scripture reference in a sense 
Term other than the obvious and literal one 

which lay in the mind and intent of 
the writer; (2) the theory that a passage, according 
to its original intent, may have more than one 
meaning or application; (3) the general principle 
of adaptation on the part of God in His self-reve- 
lation to man's mental and spiritual capacity. 

Important issues are involved in the discussion 
of this subject in each of the three divisions thus 

naturally presented to us in the vari- 

2. The Im- ous uses of the term. These issues 
portance of culminate in the supremely impor- 
the Subject tant principles which underlie the 

question of God's adaptation of His 
revelation to men. 

II. Accommodated Application of Scripture 
Passages. — It is obvious that the nature of thought 

and of language is such as to consti- 

1. Interpre- tute for all human writings, among 
tation a • which the Bible, as a document to be 
Science understood, must be placed, a science 

of interpretation with a definite body 
of laws which cannot be violated or set aside with- 
out confusion and error. This excludes the inde- 
terminate and arbitrary exegesis of any passage. 
It must be interpreted with precision and in 
accordance with recognized laws of interpretation. 
The first and most fundamental of these laws is 
that a passage is to be interpreted in accordance 
with the intent of the writer in so far as that can 
be ascertained. The obvious, Uteral and original 
meaning always has the right of way. All arbi- 
trary twisting of a passage in order to obtain from 
it new and remote meanings not justified by the 
context is unscientific and misleading. 

There is, however, a scientific and legitimate 
use of the principle of accommodation. For ex- 
ample, it is impossible to determine 

2. Scientific beforehand that a writer's specific 
Accommo- application of a general principle is 
dation the only one of which it is capable. 

A bald and Uteral statement of fact 
may involve a general principle which is capable 
of broad and effective application in other spheres 
than that originally contemplated. It is perfectly 
legitimate to detach a writer's statement from its 
context of secondary and incidental detail and give 
it a harmonious setting of wider application. It 
will be seen from this that legitimate accommoda- 
tion involves two things: (1) the acceptance of 
the author's primary and literal meaning; (2) the 
extension of that meaning through the establish- 
ment of a broader context identical in principle 
with the original one. In the article on Quota- 
tions IN NT (q.v.) this use of the term accommoda- 
tion, here treated in the most general terms, is 
dealt with in detail. See also Intekprbtation. 

///. Double Reference in Scripture. — The second 
use of the term accommodation now emerges for 

discussion. Are we to infer the presence of double 
reference, or secondary meanings in Scripture? 
Here again we must distinguish between the legiti- 
mate and illegitimate application of a principle. 
While we wisely deprecate the tendency to look 
upon Scripture passages as cryptic utterances, we 
must also recognize that many Scripture references 
may have more than a single application. 

We must recognize in the Scriptures the use of 

allegory, the peculiar quality of which, as a form of 

literature, is the double reference 

1. Allegory which it contains. To interpret the 
in Scripture story of the Bramble-King (Jgs 9 

7-15) or the Parables of Our Lord 
without reference to the double meanings which 
they involve would be as false and arbitrary as 
any extreme of allegorizing. The double meaning 
is of the essence of the Uterary expression. This 
does not mean, of course, that the poetry of the 
Bible, even that of the Prophets and Apocalyptic 
writers, is to be looked upon as allegorical. On the 
contrary, only that writing, whether prose or 
poetry, is to be interpreted m any other than its 
natural and obvious sense, in connection with which 
we have definite indications of its allegorical char- 
acter. Figures of speech and poetical expressions 
in general, though not intended to be taken literally 
because they belong to the poetical form, are not 
to be taken as having occult references and alle- 
gorical meanings. Dr. A. B. Davidson thus char- 
acterizes the prophetic style {OT Prophecy, 171; 
see whole chapter): "Prophecy is poetical, but it 
is not allegorical. The language of prophecy is 
real as opposed to allegorical, and poetical as 
opposed to real. When the prophets speak of 
natural objects or of lower creatures, they do not 
mean human things by them, or human beings, 
but these natural objects or creatures themselves. 
When Joel speaks of locusts, he means those 
creatures. When he speaks of the sun and moon 
and stars, he means those bodies." Allegory, 
therefore, which contains the double reference, in 
the sense of spealdng of one thing while meaning 
another, is a definite and recognizable literary form 
with its own proper laws of interpretation. See 

There is progress in the understanding of Scrip- 
ture. New reaches of truth are continually being 
brought to light. By legitimate and 

2. Hidden natural methods hidden meanings are 
Truths of being continually discovered. 
Scripture (1) It is a well-attested fact that 

apart from any supernatural factor 
a writer sometimes speaks more wisely than he 
knows. He is the partially unconscious agent for 
the expression of a great truth, not only for his own 
age, but for all time. It is not often given to such 
a really great writer or to his age to recognize all 
the implications of his thought. Depths of meaning 
hidden both from the original writer and from earlier 
interpreters may be disclosed by moving historical 
sideUghts. The element of permanent value in 
great literature is due to the fact that the writer 
utters a greater truth than cain exhaustively be 
known in any one era. It belongs to all time. 

(2) The supernatural factor which has gone to 
the making of Scripture insures that no one man 
or group of men, that not all men together,^ can 
know it exhaustively. It partakes of the inex- 
haustibleness of God. It is certain, therefore, that 
it will keep pace with the general progress of man, 
exhibiting new phases of meaning as it moves along 
the stream of history. Improved exegetical appa- 
ratus and methods, enlarged apprehensions into 
widening vistas of thought and knowledge, increased 
insight under the tutelage of the Spirit in the 
growing Kingdom of God, will conspire to draw 



up new meanings from the depths of Scripture. 
The thought of God in any given expression of 
truth can only be progressively and approximately 
known by human beings who begin in ignorance 
and must be taught what they know. 

(3) The supernatural factor in revelation also 
implies a twofold thought in every important or 
fundamental statement of Scripture: the thought 
of God uttered thi'ough His Spirit to a man or his 
generation, and that same thought with reference 
to the coming ages and to the whole truth which 
is to be disclosed. Every separate item belonging 
to an organism of truth would naturally have a 
twofold reference: first, its significance alone and 
of itself; second, its significance with reference to 
the whole of which it is a part. As all great 
Scriptural truths are thus organically related, it 
follows that no one of them can be fully known 
apart from all the others. From which it follows 
also that in a process of gradual revelation where 
trutlis are given successively as men are able to 
receive them and where each successive truth 
prepares the way for others which are to follow, 
every earlier statement will have two ranges of 
meaning and apphcation — -that which is intrinsic 
and that which flows from its connection with 
the entire organism of unfolding truth which finally 

(1) The principles thus far expressed carry us 
a certain way toward an answer to the most impor- 
tant question which arises under this 

3. Prophecy division of the general topic: the 
and Its Ful- relation between the OT and the NT 
filment through prophecy and its fulfilment. 

Four specific points of connection in- 
volving the principles of prophetic anticipation 
and historical realization in the career of Jesus are 
alleged by NT writers. They are of vital impor- 
tance, inasmuch aa these four groups of interpreta- 
tions involve the most important elements of the 
OT and practically the entire NT interpretation of 

(2) (a) The promise made to Abraham (Gen 12 
1-3; cf 13 14-18; 15 1-6, etc) and repeated in 
substance at intervals dui-ing the history of Israel 
(see Ex 6 7; Lev 26 12; Dt 26 17-19; 29 12.13; 
2 S 7; 1 Ch 17, etc) is interpreted as having 
reference to the distant future and as fulfilled in 
Christ (see Gal 3 for example of this interpreta- 
tion, esp. ver 14; also Quotations in NT). 

(6) The OT system of sacrifices is looked upon 
as t3fpical and symbolic, hence, predictive and 
reahzed in the death of Christ interpreted as atone- 
ment for sin (He 10, etc). 

(c) References in the OT to kings or a king of 
David's line whose advent and reign are spoken of 
are interpreted as definite predictions fulfilled in 
the advent and career of Jesus the Messiah (Ps 2, 
16, 22, 110; cf Lk 1 69, etc). 

(d) The prophetic conception of the servant of 
Jeh (Isa 42 If; 44 1 f; 62 13—53 12; cf Acts 
8 32-35) is interpreted as being an anticipatory 
description of the character and work of Jesus 
centering in His vicarious sin-bearing death. 

(3) With the details of interpretation as involved 
in the specific use of OT statements we are not 
concerned here (see "Quotations," etc) but only 
with the general principles which underUe all such 
uses of the OT. The problem is: Can we thus 
interpret any passage or group of passages in the 
OT without being guilty of what has been called 
"pedantic supernaturalism" ; that is, of distorting 
Scripture by interpreting it without regard to its 
natural historical connections? Is the interpre- 
tation of the OT Messianically legitimate or ille- 
gitimate accommodation? 

(a) It is a widely accepted canon of modern 

interpretation that the institutions of OT worship 
and the various messages of the prophets had an 
intrinsic contemporary significance. 

(6) But tliis is not to say that its meaning and 
value are exhausted in that immediate contem- 
porary apphcation. Beyond question the prophet 
was a man with a message to his own age, but 
there is nothing incompatible, in that fact, with 
his having a message, the full significance of which 
reaches beyond his own age, even into the far dis- 
tant future. It would serve to clear the air in this 
whole region if it were only understood that it is 
precisely upon its grasp of the future that the lever- 
age of a great message for immediate moral uplift 
rests. The predictive element is a vital part of the 
contemporary value. 

(c) The material given under the preceding 
analysis may be dealt with as a whole on the basis 
of a principle fundamental to the entire OT economy, 
namely: that each successive age in the history of 
Israel is dealt with on the basis of truth common 
to the entire movement of which the history of 
Israel is but a single phase. It is further to be 
remembered that relationship between the earUer 
and later parts of the Bible is one of organic and 
essential unity, both doctrinal and historical.^ By 
virtue of this fact the predictive element is an 
essential factor in the doctrines and institutions of 
the earlier dispensation as originally constituted 
and delivered, hence forming a part of its contem- 
porary significance and value, both pointing to the 
future and preparing the way for it. In like 
manner, the element of fulfilment is an essential 
element of the later dispensation as the completed 
outcome of the movement begun long ages before. 
Prediction and fulfilment are essential factors in 
any unified movement begun, advanced and com- 
pleted according to a single plan in successive 
periods of time. We have now but to apply this 
principle in general to the OT material already in 
hand to reach definite and satisfactory conclusions. 

(4) (o) The promise made to Abraham was a 
living message addressed directly to him in the 
immediate circumstances of his life upon which the 
delivery and acceptance of the promise made a 
permanent impress; but it was of vaster proportions 
than could be realized within the compass of a 
single human life; for it included himself, his pos- 
terity, and all mankind in a single circle of promised 
blessing. So far as the patriarch was concerned 
the immediate, contemporary value of the promise 
lay in the fact that it concerned him not alone but 
in relationship to the future and to mankind. A 
prediction was thus imbedded in the very heart 
of the word of God which was the object of his 
faith — a prediction which served to ensphere his 
fife in the plan of God for all mankind and to 
fasten his ambition to the service of that plan. 
The promise was predictive in its essence and in its 
contemporary meaning (see Beecher, Prophets and 
Promise, 213). 

(b) So also it is with the Messianic King. The 
Kingdom as an institution in Israel is described 
from the beginning as the perpetual mediatorial 
reign of God upon earth (see Ex 19 3-6; 2 S 7 
8-16, etc), and the King in whom the Kingdom 
centers is God's Son (2 S 7 13.15) and earthly 
representative. In all this there is much that is 
immediately contemporaneous. The Kingdom and 
the Kingship are described in terms of the ideal 
and that ideal is used in every age as the ground of 
immediate appeal to loyalty and devotion on the 
part of the King. None the less the predictive 
element lies at the center of the representation. 
The very first recorded expression of the Messianic 
promise to David involves the prediction of uncon- 
ditioned perpetuity to his house, and thus grasps 



the entire future. More than this, the character- 
istics, the functions, the dignities of the king are so 
described (Ps 102; Isa 9 6.7) as to make it clear 
that the conditions of the Kingship could be met 
only by ah uniquely endowed person coming forth 
from God and exercising divine functions in a world- 
wide spiritual empire. Such a King being described 
and such a Kingdom being promised, the recipients 
of it, of necessity, were set to judge the present 
and scrutinize the future for its realization. The 
conception is, in its original meaning and expression, 
essentially predictive. 

(c) Very closely allied with this conception of the 
Messianic King is the proi)hetic ideal of the Serv- 
ant of Jeh. Looked at in its original context we 
at once discover that it is the ideal delineation 
of a mediatorial service to men in behalf of Jeh 
— which has a certain meaning of fulfilment in 
any person who exhibits the Divine character by 
teaching the truth and ministering to human need 
(for appUcation of the term see Isa 49 5.6.7; 
50 10; esp. 45 1). But the service is described 
in such exalted terms, the devotion exacted by it 
is so high, that, in the application of the ideal as 
a test to the present and to the nation at large, the 
mind is inevitably thrown into the future and 
centered upon a supremely endowed individual to 
come, who is by preeminence the Servant of Jeh. 

(d) The same principle may be applied with 
equal effectiveness to the matter of Israel's sacri- 
ficial system. In the last two instances this fact 
emerged: No truth and no institution can ex- 
haustively be known until it has run a course in 
history. For example, the ideas embodied in the 
Messianic Kingship and the conception of the 
Servant of Jeh could be known only in the light 
of history. Only in view of the actual struggles 
and failures of successive kings and successive 
generations of the people to realize such ideals 
could their fuU significance be disclosed. More- 
over, only by historic process of preparation could 
such ideals ultimately be realized. This is pre- 
eminently true of the OT sacrifices. It is clear 
that the NT conception of the significance of OT 
sacrifice in connection with the death of Christ 
is based upon the behef that the idea embodied 
in the original institution could be fulfilled only in 
the voluntary sacrifice of Christ (see He 10 1-14) . 
This view is justified by the facts. Dr. Davidson 
(op. cit., 239) holds that the predictive element in 
the OT sacrifices lay in their imperfection. This 
imperfection, while inherent, could be revealed 
only in experience. As they gradually deepened 
a sense of need which they could not satisfy, more 
and more clearly they pointed away from them- 
selves to that transaction which alone could reaUze 
in fact what they express in symbol. A harmony 
such as obtained between OT sacrifice and the 
death of Christ could only be the result of design. 
It is all one movement, one fundamental operation; 
historically prefigured and prepared for by antici- 
pation, and historically realized. OT sacrifice 
was instituted both to prefigure and to prepare the 
way for the sacrifice of Christ in the very process 
of fulfilling its natural historic function in the 
economy of Israel. 

The total outcome of the discussion is this: 
the interpretation of these representative OT 

ideas and institutions as referring to 
4. Con- Christ and anticipating His advent 
elusion is no illegitimate use of the principle 

of accommodation. The future ref- 
erence which takes in the entire historical process 
which culminates in Christ lies within the immediate 
and original application and constitutes an essen- 
tial element of its contemporary value. The 
original statement is in its very nature predictive 

and is one in doctrinal principle and historic con- 
tinuity with that which forms its fulfilment. 

IV. Accommodation in Revelation. — (1) It is 
evident that God's revelation to men must be con- 
veyed in comprehensible terms and 

1. General adjusted to the nature of the human 
Principles understanding. That is clearly not 

a revelation which does not reveal. 
A disclosure of God's character and ways to men 
involves the use and control of the human spirit 
in accordance with its constitution and laws. The 
doctrine of inspiration inseparable from that of 
revelation implies such a divine control of human 
faculties as to enable them, still freely working 
within their own normal sphere, to apprehend and 
interpret truth otherwise beyond their reach. 

(2) The Bible teaches that in the height and 
depth of His being God is unsearchable. His 
mind and the human mind are quantitatively 
incommensurable. Man cannot by searching find 
out God. His ways are not our ways and His 
thoughts are not our thoughts. 

(3) But, on the other hand, the Bible affirms 
with equal emphasis the essential qualitative 
kinship of the divine and the human constitutions. 
God is spirit — man is spirit also. Man is made in 
the image of God and made to know God. These 
two principles together affirm the necessity and 
the possibifity of revelation. Revelation, con- 
sidered as an exceptional order of experience due 
to acts of God performed with the purpose of 
making Himself known in personal relationship 
with man, is necessary because man's finite nature 
needs guidance. Revelation is possible because 
man is capable of such guidance. The Bible 
affirms that God's thoughts are not our thoughts, 
but that they may become ours because God can 
utter them so that we can receive them. 

(4) These two principles lead to a most impor- 
tant conclusion. In all discussions of the principle 
of accommodation it is to be remembered that the 
capacity of the human mind to construct does not 
measure its capacity to receive and appropriate. 
The human mind can be taught what it cannot 
independently discover. No teacher is limited 
by the capacity of his pupils to deal unaided with 
a subject of study. He is limited only by their 
capacity to follow him in his processes of thought 
and exposition. The determining factor in reve- 
lation, which is a true educative process, is the 
mind of God which stamps itself upon the kindred 
and plastic mind of man. 

(1) The beginnings of revelation. Since man's 

experience is organically conditioned he is under 

the law of growth. His entire mental 

2. Accom- and spiritual life is related to his 
modation a part and lot in the kingdom of organ- 
Feature of isms. The very laws of his mind 
Progressive reveal themselves only upon occasion 
Revelation in experience. While it is true that 

his tendencies are innate, so that he is 
compelled to think and to feel in certain definite 
ways, yet it is true that he can neither think nor 
feel at all except as experience presents material 
for thought and applies stimulus to feeling. Man 
must live in order to learn. He must, therefore, 
learn gradually. This fact conditions all revela- 
tion. Since it must deal with men it must be 
progressive, and since it must be progressive it 
must necessarily involve, in its earlier stages, the 
principle of accommodation. In order to gain 
access to man's mind it must take him where he is 
and link itself with his natural aptitudes and 
native modes of thought. Since revelation in- 
volves the endeavor to form in the mind of man 
the idea of God in order that a right relationship 
with Him may be established, it enters both the 




intellectual and moral life of the human race and 
must accommodate itself to the humble beginnings 
of early human experience. The chief problem of 
revelation seems to have been to bring these 
crude beginnings within the scope of a movement 
the aim and end of which is perfection. The apph- 
cation of the principle of accommodation to early 
human experience with a view to progress is 
accompHshed by doing what at first thought seems 
to negate the very principle upon which the mental 
and moral life of man must permanently rest, 
(o) It involves the authoritative revelations of 
incomplete and merely tentative truths. (6) It 
involves also the positive enactment of rudimen- 
tary and imperfect morality. 

In both these particulars Scripture has accom- 
modated itself to crude early notions and placed 
the seal of authority upon principles which are 
outgrown and discarded within the limits of Scrip- 
ture itself. But in so doing Scripture has saved 
the very interests it has seemed to imperil by virtue 
of two features of the human constitution which 
in themselves lay hold upon perfection and serve to 
bind together the crude beginnings and the mature 
achievements of the human race. These two 
principles are (c) the id«a of truth; (d) the idea of 

(2) It is mainly due to these two factors of human 
nature that any progress in truth and conduct is 
possible to men. What is true or right in matter of 
specific fact varies in the judgment of different 
individuals and of different ages. But the august 
and compelling twin convictions of truth and 
right, aa absolute, eternal, authoritative, are 
present from the beginning of human history to 
the end of it. Scripture seizes upon the fact that 
these great ideas may be enforced through crude 
human conceptions and at very rudimentary 
stages of culture, and enforcing them by means of 
revelation and imperative law brings man to the 
test of truth and right and fosters his advance to 
larger conceptions and broader applications of 
both fundamental principles. Canon Mozley in 
discussing this principle of accommodation on its 
moral side, its necessity and its fruitfulness, says: 
"How can the law properly fulfil its object of cor- 
recting and improving the moral standard of men, 
unless it first maintains in obligation the standard 
which already exists? Those crudely delineated 
conceptions, which it tends ultimately to purify 
and raise, it must first impose" (Ruling Ideas in 
Early Ages, 183; cf Mt 5 17 with 21.27.33). 

Since the chief end of revelation is to form the 
mind of man with reference to the purpose and will 
of God to the end that man may enter 
3. The into fellowship with God, the question 

Limits of arises as to how far revelation will be 
Revelation accommodated by the limitation of 
its sphere. How far does it seek to 
form the mind and how far does it leave the mind 
to its own laws and to historical educative forces? 
Four foundation principles seem to be sufficiently 
clear: (a) Revelation accepts and uses at every 
stage of its history such materials from the common 
stock of human ideas as are true and of permanent 
worth. The superstructure of revelation rests 
upcn a foundation of universal and fundamental 
human convictions. It appeals continually to the 
rooted instincts and regulative ideas of the human 
soul deeply implanted as. a preparation for reve- 
lation. (6) Regard is paid in Scripture to man's 
nature as free and responsible. He is a rational 
being who must be taught through persuasion; 
he is a moral being who must be controlled through 
his conscience and will. There must be, there- 
fore, throughout the process of revelation an ele- 
ment of free, spontaneous, unforced life in and 

through which the supernatural factors work. 

(c) Revelation must have reference, even in its 
earliest phases of development, to the organism of 
truth as a whole. What is actually given at any 
time must contribute its quota to the ultimate 
summing up and completion of the entire process. 

(d) Revelation must guard against injurious errors 
which trench upon essential and vital matters. 
In short, the consistency and integrity of the move- 
ment through which truth is brought to disclosure 
must sacredly be guarded; while, at the same 
time, since it is God and man who are coming to 
know each other, revelation must be set in a 
broad environment of human life and entrusted 
to the processes of history. See Revelation. 

It is now our task briefly to notice how in Scrip- 
ture these interests are safeguarded. We must 

notice (o) the principle of accommo- 
4. The dation in general. It has often been 

Outcome of pointed out that in every book of the 
Revelation Bible the inimitable physiognomy of 

the writer and the age is preserved; 
that the Biblical language with reference to Nature 
is the language of phenomena; that its doctrines 
are stated vividly, tropically, concretely and in the 
forms of speech natural to the age in which they 
were uttered; that its historical documents are, for 
the most part, artless annals of the ancient oriental 
type; that it contains comparatively Uttle infor- 
mation concerning Nature or man which antici- 
pates scientific discovery or emancipates the 
religious man who accepts it as a guide from going 
to school to Nature and human experience for such 
information. All this, of course, without touching 
upon disputed points or debated questions of fact, 
involves, from the point of view of the Divine mind 
to which all things are known, and of the human 
mind to which certain facts of Nature hidden in 
antiquity have been disclosed, the principles of 
accommodation. Over against this we must set 
certain contrasting facts : 

(b) The Scripture shows a constant tendency to 
transcend itself and to bring the teaching of the 
truth to a higher level. The simple, primitive 
ideas and rites of the patriarchal age are succeeded 
by the era of organized national Hfe with its ideal of 
uiiity and the intensified sense of national calling 
and destiny under the leadership of God. The 
national idea of church and kingdom broadens 
out into the universal conception and world-wide 
mission of Christianity. The sacrificial symbolism 
of the OT gives way to the burning ethical realities 
of the Incarnate Life. The self-limitation of the 
Incarnation broadens out into the world-wide 
potencies of the era of the Spirit who uses the letter 
of Scripture as the instrument of His universal 
ministry. It is thus seen that by the progressive 
method through a cumulative process God has 
gradually transcended the limitation of His instru- 
ments while at the same time He has continuously 
broadened and deepened the Spirit of man to 
receive His self-disclosure. 

(c) More than this, Scripture throughout is 
marked by a certain distinct and unmistakable 
quality of timelessness. It continually urges and 
suggests the infinite, the eternal, the unchangeable. 
It is part of the task of revelation to anticipate so 
as to guide progress. At every stage it keeps the 
minds of men on the stretch with a truth that they 
are not able at that stage easily to apprehend. 
The inexhaustible vastness and the hidden fulness 
of truth are everywhere implied. Prophets and 
Apostles are continually in travail with truths 
brought to their own ages from afar. The great 
fundamental verities of Scripture are stated with 
uncompromising fulness and finality. There is 
no accommodation to human weakness or error. 




Its ideals, its standards, its conditions are absolute 
and inviolate. 

Not only has Israel certain fundamental ideas 
which are peculiar to herself, but there has been 
an organizing spirit, an "unique, spirit of inspi- 
ration" which has modified and transformed the 
materials held by her in common with her Sem 
kindred. Even her inherited ideas and institu- 
tions are transformed and infused with new mean- 
ings. We note the modification of Sem customs, as 
for example in blood revenge, by which savagery 
has been mitigated and evil associations eliminated. 
We note the paucity of mythological material. 
If the stories of Adam, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, 
Samson were originally mythological they have 
ceased to be such in the Bible. They have been 
humanized and stripped of superhuman features. 
(See "Fable," HGHL, 220 ff.) 

If we yield to the current hypothesis as to the 
Babylonian background of the narratives in Gen, 
we are stUl more profoundly impressed with that 
unique assimilative power, working in Israel, which 
has enabled the BibUcal writers to eradicate the 
deep-seated polytheism of the Bab documents and 
to stamp upon them the inimitable features of their 
own high monotheism (see Babylonia). We note 
the reserve of Scripture, the constant restraint 
exercised upon the imagination, the chastened 
doctrinal sobriety in the Bible references to angels 
and demons, in its Apocalyptic imagery, in its 
Messianic promises, in its doctrines of rewards 
and punishments. In all these particulars the 
Bible stands unique by contrast, not merely with 
popular thought, but with the extra-canonical ht. 
of the Jewish people (see Demons, etc) . 

We come at this point upon a most central and 
difficult problem. It is, of com'se, alleged that 
Christ adopted the attitude of con- 
6. The currence, which was also one of ac- 

Question as commodation, in popular views con- 
to Christ's cerning angels and demons, etc. It 
Method is disputed whether this goes back 
to the essential accommodation in- 
volved in the self-limiting of the Incarnation so 
that as man He should share the views of His 
contemporaries, or whether, with wider knowledge, 
He accommodated Himself for pedagogical pur- 
poses to erroneous views of the untaught people 
about Him (see DCG, art. "Accommodation"). 
The question is complicated by our ignorance of 
the facts. We cannot say that Jesus accommo- 
dated Himself to the ignorance of the populace 
unless we are ready to pronounce authoritatively 
upon the truth or falseness of the popular theory. 
It is not our province in this article to enter upon 
that discussion (see Incarnation and Kenosis). 
We can only point out that the reserve of the NT 
and the absence of all imaginative extravagance 
shows that if accommodation has been applied it 
is most strictly limited in its scope. In this it is 
in harmony with the entire method of Scripture, 
where the ignorance of men is regarded in the pre- 
sentation of God's truth, while at the same time 
their growing minds are protected against the errors 
which would lead them astray from the direct 
path of progress into the whole truth reserved in 
the Divine counsel. 

I.iTEBATTTHE.— (a) Por the flfst divlsion of the subject 
consult standard works on Science of Interpretation and 
Homiletics sub loc. , ^^ , t, 

(6) For second division, among others. Dr. A. B. 
Davidson, OT Prophecy; Dr. Willis J. Beecber, Prophets 
and Promise. . 

(c) For the third division, the most helpful single 
worli is the one quoted: Mozley, Ruling Ideas in Early 
Ages, published by Longmans as "OT Lectures." 

Louis Matthews Sweet 
ACCOMPLISH, a-kom'plish: Richly repre- 
sented iu the OT by seven Heb synonyms and in 

the NT by five Gr (AV): signifying in Heb (1) 
"to complete" (Lam 4 11); (2) "to fulfil" (Dnl 9 
2); (3) "to execute" (1 K 6 9); (4) "to set 
apart" i.e. "consecrate" (Lev 22 21); (5) "to 
establish" (Jer 44 25 AV); (6) "to have pleasure 
in" (Job 14 6); (7) "to perfect" (Ps 64 6); in Gr 
(1) "to finish" (Acts 21 5); (2) "to bring to an 
end" (He 9 6); (3) "to be fulfilled" (Lk 2 6); 
(4) "to fill out" (Lk 9 31); (5) "to complete" 
(Lk 12 50). 

INGLY, a-kord'ing-li: In OT HE, peh, "mouth," 
"to fight with one accord" (Josh 9 2). ''^b, I'phl, 
"according to the mouth of," "according to their 
famifies" (Gen 47 12, "ace. to [the number of] 
their little ones" RVm). In Isa 59 18 the same 
Heb word, 5?? , h'^al, is rendered "according to" 
and "accordingly." In NT oiiodv/iadiv, homothv^ 
maddn, indicative of harmony of mind or action, 
(Acts 1 14; 2 46; 7 57; 18 12) and icard, kaid, 
"of the same mind .... ace. to Christ Jesus" 
(Rom 15 5); airdfuiTos, auidmatos, "of itself," 
"without constraint," "opened to them of its own 
accord" (Acts 12 10), i.e. without human agency 
(of Lev 25 5 AV; Mk 4 28); aiBalperos, authai- 
retos, "of his own free choice" (2 Cor 8 17). 
God "will render to every man according to his 
works" (Rom 2 6), that is, agreeably to the nature 
of his works (1 Cor 3 8), but salvation is not 
according to works (2 Tim 1 9; Titus 3 5). See 
Deed. M. O. Evans 

ACCOS, ak'os ("Akx«s, Hakchos): The grand- 
father of Eupolemus, whom Judas Maccabaeus 
sent with others to Rome in 161 BC, to negotiate 
a "league of amity and confederacy" (1 Mace 8 
17). The name occurs in the OT as Hakkoz 
(fipn, hakkos), who was a priest in the reign of 
David (1 Ch 24 10). 

ACCOUNT, a-kount'. See Accountability. 

ACCOUNTABILITY, a-koun-ta-bil'i-ti : The 
general teaching of Scripture on this subject is 

summarized in Rom 14 12: "So then 
1. Scriptur- each one of us shall give account of 
alPrinciples himself to God." But this implies, 

on the one hand, the existence of a 
Moral Ruler of the universe, whose wiU is revealed, 
and, on the other, the possession by the creature 
of knowledge and free will. In Rom 4 15 it is 
expressly laid down that, 'where no law is, neither 
is there transgression'; but, lest this might seem 
to exclude from accountability those to whom the 
law of Moses was not given, it is shown that even 
heathen had the law to some extent revealed in 
conscience; so that they are "without excuse" 
(Rom 1 20). "For as many as have sinned without 
the law shall also perish without the law: and as 
many as have sinned under the law shall be judged 
by the law" (Rom 2 12). So says Paul in a passage 
which is one of the profoundest discussions on the 
subject of accountability, and with his sentiment 
agrees exactly the word of Our Lord on the same 
subject, in.Lk 12 47.48: "And that servant, who 
knew his lord's will, and made not ready, nor did 
according to his will, shall be beaten with many 
stripes; but he that knew not, and did things 
worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. 
And to whomsoever much is given, of him shall 
much be required: and to whom they commit 
much, of him will they ask the more." There is a 
gradual development of accountabihty accom- 
panying the growth of a human being from infancy 
to maturity; and there is a similar development in 




the race, as knowledge grows from less to more. 
In the full light of the gospel human beings are 
far more responsible than they were in earlier 
stages of intellectual and spiritual development, 
and the doom to which they wiU be exposed on 
the day of account will be heavy in proportion to 
their privileges. This may seem to put too great 
a premium on ignorance; and a real difficulty 
arises when we say that, the more of moral sensitive- 
ness there is, the greater is the guilt; because, as 
is well known, moral sensitiveness can be lost 
through persistent disregard of conscience; from 
which it might seem to follow that the way to 
diminish guilt was to silence the voice of conscience. 
There must, however, be a difference between the 
responsibihty of a conscience that has never been 
enlightened and that of one which, having once 
been enlightened, has lost, through neglect or 
recklessness, the goodness once possessed. In the 
practice of the law, for example, it is often claimed 
that a crime committed under the influence of 
intoxication should be condoned; yet everyone 
must feel how different this is from innocence, 
and that, before a higher tribunal, the culprit will 
be held to be twice guilty — first, of the sin of 
drunkenness and then of the crime. 

Wherever civilization is so advanced that there 
exists a code of public law, with punishments 

attached to transgression, there goes 
2. Connec- on a constant education in the sense 
tion with of accountability; and even the 
Immortality heathen mind, in classical times, had 

advanced so far as to beUeve in a 
judgment beyond the veil, when the shades had to 
appear before the tribunal of Rhadamanthus, 
Minos and jEacus, to have their station and degree 
in the underworld decided according to the deeds 
done in the body. How early the Hebrews had 
made as much progress has to be discussed in con- 
nection with the doctrine of immortality; but it is 
certain that, before the OT canon closed, they 
beheved not only in a judgment after death but 
in resurrection, by which the sense of accounta- 
bility was fastened far more firmly on the popular 
mind. Long before, however, there was awakened 
by the sacred Uterature the sense of a judgment of 
God going on during the present life and expressing 
itself in everyone's condition. The history of the 
world was the judgment of the world; prosperity 
attended the steps of the good man, but retribu- 
tion sooner or later struck down the wicked. It 
was from the difficulty of reconciling with this 
behef the facts of life that the skepticism of Heb 
thought arose; but by the same constraint the 
pious mind was pushed forward in the direction 
of the full doctrine of immortality. This came with 
the advent of Him who brought life and immor- 
tafity to light by His gospel (2 Tim 1 10). In 
the mind of Jesus not only were resurrection, 
judgment and immortality unquestionable postu- 
lates; but He was brought into a special connection 
with accountability through His consciousness of 
being the Judge of mankind, and, in His numerous 
references to the Last .Judgment, He developed 
the principles upon which the conscience will then 
be tried, and by which accordingly it ought now 
to try itself. In this connection the Parable of the 
Talents is of special significance; but it is by the 
grandiose picture of the scene itself, which follows 
in the same chapter of the First Gospel, that the 
mind of Christendom has been most powerfully 
influenced. Reference has already been made to 
the discussions at the commencement of the Epistle 
to the Romans in which our subject finds a place. 
By some the apostle John has been supposed to 
revert to the OT notion of a judgment proceeding 
now in place of coming at the Last Day; but 

Weiss (Der johanneische Lehrbegriff, II, 9) has 
proved that this is a mistake. 

Up to this point we have spoken of individual 
accountabihty; but the subject becomes more 
compUcated when we think of the 
3. Joint and joint responsibility of several or many 
Corporate persons. From the first the human 
Responsi- mind has been haunted by what is 
bility called the guilt of Adam's first sin. 

There is a soUdarity in the human 
race, and the inheritance of evil is too obvious to be 
denied even by the most optimistic. "There is 
far, however, from being agreement of opinion as 
to the relation of the individual to this evil legacy; 
some contending fiercely against the idea that the 
individual can have any personal responsibility 
for a sin hidden in a past so distant and shadowy, 
while others maintain that the misery which has 
certainly been inherited by all can only be justi- 
fied in a world governed by a God of justice if the 
guilt of all precedes the misery. The question 
enters deeply into the Pauline scheme, although 
at the most critical point it is much disputed what 
the Apostle's real position is. While joint respon- 
sibility burdens the individual conscience, it may, 
at the same time, be said to lighten it. Thus, in 
Ezk 18 one of the most weighty ethical discussions 
to be found in Holy Writ is introduced with the 
popular proverb, "The fathers have eaten sour 
grapes, arid the children's teeth are set on edge," 
which proves to be a way of saying that the respon- 
sibihty of children is hghtened, if not aboUshed, 
through their connection with their parents. In 
the same way, at the present time, the sense of 
responsibility is enfeebled in many minds through 
the control over character and destiny _ ascribed 
to heredity and environment. Even criminality 
is excused on the ground that many have never 
had a chance of virtue, and it is contended that 
to know everything is to forgive everything. 
There can be no doubt that, as the agents of trusts 
and partnerships, men will aUow themselves to 
do what they would never have thought of in pri- 
vate business; and in a crowd the individual sus- 
tains psychological modifications by which he is 
made to act very differently from his ordinary 
self. In the actions of nations, such as war, there 
is a vast and solemn responsibility somewhere; 
but it is often extremely difficult to locate it — 
whether in the ruler, the ministry or the people. 
So interesting and perplexing are such problems 
often that a morahty for bodies of people, as dis- 
tinguished from individuals, is felt by many to be 
the great desideratum of ethics at the present time. 

On this subject something will be found in most 
of the works on either philosophical or Christian 
ethics; see esp. Lemme's Chrisiliche Ethik, 242 ff. 

Tamfs Stat tct'ti 

ACCOZ, ak'oz ('AkP<5s, Akhbs; RV AKKOS, 
q.v.) : 1 Esd 6 38, head of one of the priestly 
families, which returned from the Exile, but was 
unable to prove its descent, when the register was 
searched. See also Ezr 2 61. 

ACCURSED, a-kArs'ed, a-kArst': In the Book 
of Josh (6 17.18; 7 and 1 Ch (2 7) 
"accursed" (or "accursed thing" or "thing ac- 
cursed") is the AV rendering of the Heb word, 
□"in, herem. The RV consistently uses "de- 
voted" or "devoted thing," which the AV also 
adopts in Lev 27 21.28.29 and in Nu 18 14. 
"Cursed thing" is the rendering in two passages 
(Dt 7 26; 13 17); and in one passage (Ezk 44 29 
AV) "dedicated thing" is used. In four places 
the AV renders the word by "curse" (Josh 6 18; 
Isa 34 5; 43 28; Mai 3 24; [4 6]) whilst in 
'another passage (Zee 14 11) "utter destruction" 




is adopted in tr. These various renderings are 
due to the fact that the word herem sometimes 
means the act of devoting or banning (or the 
condition or state resulting therefrom) and some- 
times the object devoted or banned. We occa- 
sionally find periphrastic renderings, e.g. 1 S 
15 21: "the chief of the things which should 
have been utterly destroyed," AV (lit. "the chief 
part of the ban"); 1 K 20 42: "a man whom I 
appointed to utter destruction," AV (lit. "a man of 
my ban" (or "banning"). The root-word meant 
"to separate," "shut off." The Arab, fianm de- 
noted the precincts of the temple at Mecca, and 
also the women's apartment (whence the word 
harem). In Heb the word always suggested "sep- 
arating" or "devoting to God." Just as TC~]5, 
Ifadhosh, meant "holy" or "consecrated to the serv- 
ice" of Jeh, and so not liable to be used for ordinary 
or secular purposes, so the stem of herem meant 
"devoting" to Jeh anything which would, if spared, 
corrupt or contaminate the religious life of Israel, 
with the further idea of destroying (things) or 
exterminating (persons) as the surest way of avoid- 
ing such contamination. Everything that might 
paganize or affect the unique character of the reli- 
gion of Israel was banned, e.g. idols (Dt 7 26); 
idolatrous persons (Ex 22 20); idolatrous cities 
(Dt 13 13-18). All Can. towns— where the cult of 
Baal flourished— were to be banned (Dt 20 16-18). 
The ban did not always apply to the gold and silver 
of looted cities (Josh 6 24). Such valuable arts. 
were to be placed in the "treasury of the house of 
Yahweh." This probably indicates a slackening 
of the rigid custom which involved the total destruc- 
tion of the spoil. According to Nu 18 14, "every- 
thing devoted in Israel" belonged to Aaron, and 
Ezk 44 29 AV ordained that "every dedicated 
thing" should belong to the priests (cf Ezr 10 8). 
In the NT "accursed" is the AV rendering of 
Anathkma (q.v.). Thomas Lewis 

ACCUSER, a-kuz'er: This word, not found in 
the OT, is the rendering of two Gr words: (1) Kari}- 
7opos, kattgoros, that is, a prosecutor, or plaintiff 
in a lawsuit, or one who speaks in a derogatory 
way of another (Acts 23 30.35; 25 16.18; Rev 
12 10); (2) Aid^oXos, didbolos, meaning adver- 
sary or enemy. This word is rendered "accuser" 
in the AV and "slanderer" in the RV and the 
ARV (2 Tim 3 3; Titus 2 3). According to 
the rabbinic teaching Satan, or the devil, was 
regarded as hostile to God and man, and that it 
was a part of his work to accuse the latter of dis- 
loyalty and sin before the tribunal of the former 
(see Job 1 6 ff; Zee 3 If; Rev 12 10). 

W. W. Da VIES 

ACELDAMA, a-sel'da-ma. See Akeldama. 

ACHAIA, a-ka'ya ('Axaid, Achaid): The small- 
est country in the Peloponnesus lying along the 
southern shore of the Corinthian Gulf, north of 
Arcadia and east of Elis. The original inhabitants 
were lonians; but these were crowded out later by 
the Achaeans, who came from the East. According 
to Herodotus, the former founded twelve cities, 
many of which retain their original names to this 
day. These cities were on the coast and formed a 
confederation of smaller communities, which in the 
last century of the independent history of Greece 
attained to great importance (Achaean League). 
In Rom times the term Achaia was used to include 
the whole of Greece, exclusive of Thessaly. Today 
Achaia forms with Elis one district, and contains 
a population of nearly a quarter of a million. The 
old Achaean League was renewed in 280 BC, but 
became more important in 251, when Aratus 
of Sicyon was chosen commander-in-chief. This 

great man increased the power of the League and 
gave it an excellent constitution, which our own 
great practical politicians, Hamilton and Madison, 
consulted, adopting many of its prominent devices, 
when they set about framing the Constitution of 
the United States. In 146 BC Corinth was de- 
stroyed and the League broken up (see 1 Maco 

15 23); and the whole of Greece, under the name of 
Achaia, was transformed into a Rom province, 
which was divided into two separate provinces, 
Macedonia and Achaia, in 27 BC. 

In Acts 18 12 we are told that the Jews in 
Corinth made insurrection against Paul when 
Gallio was deputy of Achaia, and in 18 27 that 
Apollos was making preparations to set out for 
Achaia. In Rom 16 5, "Achaia" should read 
"Asia" as in RV. In Acts 20 2 "Greece" means 
Achaia, but the oft-mentioned "Macedonia and 
Achaia" generally means the whole of Greece 
(Acts 19 21; Rom 15 26; 1 Thess 1 8). Paul 
commends the churches of Achaia for their liber- 
ality (2 Cor 9 13). 

LiTEBATUHE. — See Gerhard, Ueber den Volksstamm der 
A. (Berlin, 1854); Klatt, Forschungen zur Geschichte dea 
achaischen Bundes (Berlin, 1877); M. Dubois, Lea ligues 
itolienne et acheenne (Paris, 1855); Capes, History of the 
Achaean League (London, 1888); Mahaffy, Problemt, 
177-86; Busolt, Or. Slaatealter, 2d ed (1892), 347 flf; 
Toeppler, in Pauly's Realencyclopaedie. 

For Aratus see Hermann, Staatsalter, 1885; Krakauer, 
Abhandlung ueber Aratus (Breslau, 1874); Neumeyer, 
Aratua aus Sikyon (Leipzig, 1886); Holm, History of 

J. E. Habet 
ACHAICUS, a-ka'i-kus ('AxaiKds, Achaikds, 
"belonging to Achaia"): A name honorably con- 
ferred upon L. Mummius, conqueror of Corinth 
and Achaia (cf Corinth). A. was one of the 
leaders of the Corinthian church (to be inferred 
from 1 Cor 16 IS ff) who, visiting Paul at Ephesus 
with Stephanas and Fortunatus, greatly relieved 
the Apostle's anxiety for the Corinthian church 
(cf 1 Cor 5 Iff). Paul admonishes the members 
of the Cor church to submit to their authority (cf 1 
Thess 5 12) and to acknowledge their work (1 Cor 

16 15 ff). 

ACHAN, a'kan Q'SS , 'akhan [in 1 Ch 2 7 
Achar, "137, 'akhar], "troubler"): The descendant 
of Zerah the son of Judah who was put to death, 
in Joshua''s time, for stealing some of the "devoted" 
spoil of the city of Jericho (Josh 7). The stem 
'akhan is not used in Heb except in this name. 
The stem 'akhar has sufficient use to define it. It 
denotes trouble of the most serious kind — Jacob's 
trouble when his sons had brought him into blood 
feud with his Can. neighbors, or Jephthah's trouble 
when his vow required him to sacrifice his daughter 
(Gen 34 30; Jgs 11 35). In Prov (11 17.29; 
15 6.27) the word is used with intensity to describe 
the results of cruelty, disloyalty, greed, wickedness. 
The record especially speaks of Achan's conduct 
as the troubling of Israel (1 Ch 2 7; Josh 6 18; 
7 24). In an outburst of temper Jonathan speaks 
of Saul as having troubled the land (1 S 14 29). 
Elijah and Ahab accuse each the other of being the 
troubler of Israel (1 K 18 17.18). The stem also 
appears in the two proper names Achob and 
OcHBAN (q.v.). 

The crime of Achan was a serious one. Quite 
apart from all questions of supposable superstition, 
or even religion, the herem concerning Jericho had 
been proclaimed, and to disobey the proclamation 
was disobedience to military orders in an arniy 
that was facing the enemy. It is commonly held 
that Achan's family were put to death with him, 
though they were innocent; but the record is not 
explicit on these points. One whose habits of 
thought lead him to expect features of primitive 




savagery in such a case as this will be sure to find 
what he expects; a person of different habits will 
not be sure that the record says that any greater 
cruelty was practised on the family of Achan than 
that of compelling them to be present at the exe- 
cution. _ Those who hold that the Deuteronomic 
legislation comes in any sense from Moses should 
not be in haste to think that its precepts were 
violated by Joshua in the case of Achan (see Dt 
24 16). 

The record says that the execution took place 
in the arable valley of Aohor, up from the Jordan 
valley. See Aohoh. Willis J. Beecher 

ACHAR, a'kar: Variant of Achan, which see. 

ACHAZ, a'kaz ("Axa?, Achaz), AV (Mt 1 9): 
Gr form of Ahaz (thus RV). The name of a King 
of Israel. 

ACHBOR, ak'bor CliaD?, 'akhbor, "mouse"): 

(1) The father of Baal-hanan, who was the 
seventh of the eight kings who reigned in Edom 
before there were kings in Israel (Gen 36 38.39: 

1 Ch 1 49). 

(2) The son of Micaiah (called in Ch Abdon the 
son of Micah) who went with Hilkiah the priest 
and other high officials, at the command of King 
Josiah, to consult Huldah the prophetess concern- 
ing the book that had been found (2 K 22 12.14; 

2 Ch 34 20). 

It may be presumed that this Achbor is also the 
man mentioned in Jer (26 22; 36 12) as the father 
of Elnathan, who went to Egypt for King Jehoiakim 
in order to procure the extradition of Uriah the 
prophet, and who protested against the burning of 
Baruch's roll. Willis J. Beeoheb 

ACHIACHARUS, a-ki-ak'a-rus (B 'Axictxapos, 
Achidcharos; 'A\€L\apos, Achelckaros) : Governor 
of Assyria. A. is the son of Anael, a brother of 
Tobit (Tob 1 21). Sarchedonus (Esarhaddon), 
the king of Assyria, appointed him over all "ac- 
counts of his kingdom" and over all "his affairs" 
(Tob 1 21 f; cf Dnl 2 48). At his request Tobit 
comes to Nineveh (Tob 1 22). A. nourishes Tobit, 
while the latter is afflicted with disease (Tob 2 
10). He attends the wedding-feast of Tobias (Tob 
11 18). Is persecuted by Aman, but saved (Tob 
14 10). 

ACHIAS, a-ki'as: An ancestor of Ezra (2 Esd 
12). Omitted in other genealogies. 

ACHIM, a'kim ('Axetii., Acheim): A descendant 
of Zerubbabel and ancestor of Jesus, mentioned only 
in Mt 1 14. ■ 

ACHIOR, a'ki-or ('Axi<4p, Achior): General of 
the Ammonites, who spoke in behalf of Israel 
before Holof ernes, the Assyr general (Jth 5 5ff). 
Holofernes ordered him bound and delivered at 
Bethulia to the Israelites (Jth 6), who received 
him gladly and with honor. Afterward he became 
a proselyte, was circumcised, and joined to Israel 
(Jth 14). In Nu 34 27 it is the LXX reading 
for Ahihud, and in the Heb Would be ^iSTIN, 
'dhi'or, "brother of light." 

ACHIPHA, ak'i-fa; AV Acipha, as'i-fa ('Axi<|)a, 
Achiphd), in the Apoc (1 Esd 5 31) head of one 
of the families of the temple-servants, who returned 
with Zerubbabel; same as the OT Hakupha (Ezr 
2 51; Neh 7 53), which see. 

ACHISH, a'kish (tJi?X, 'akhlsh): King of- the 
city of Gath in the days of David. His father's name 
is given as Maoch (1 S 27 2), and Maacah (1 K 2 

39). David sought the protection of Achish when 
he first fled from Saul, and just after his visit to 
Nob (1 S 21 10-15). Fearing rough treatment 
or betrayal by Achish, he feigned madness. But 
this made him unwelcome, whereupon he fled to 
the Cave of Adullam (1 S 22 1). Later in his 
fugitive period David returned to Gath to be hos- 
pitably received by Achish (1 S 27 1 ff), who gave 
him the town of Ziklag for his home. A year 
later, when the Philistines invaded the land of 
Israel, in the campaign which ended so disas- 
trously for Saul (1 S 31), Achish wished David 
to participate (1 S 28 1-2), but the lords of the 
Philistines objected so strenuously, when they 
found him and his men with the forces of Achish, 
that Achish was compelled to send them back. 
Achish must have been a young man at this time, 
for he was still ruling forty years later at the 
beginning of Solomon's reign (1 K 2 39). He is 
mentioned as Abimelech in the title of Ps 34. 
See Abimelech 3. Edward Mack 

ACHITOB, ak'i-tob: Same as Ahitob. Used 
in 1 Esd 8 2; cf 2 Esd 1 1 AV. See Ahitub 3. 

ACHMETHA, ak'me-tha (Ezr 6 2; SnpnX, 
'ahmHha'; LXX 'A|jiaed, Amaihd; Pesh a ^" ■■] . 

ahmathan; in Tiglath Pileser's inscr. cir 1100 BC 
AJnadana: in Darius' Behistun Inscr., II, 76-78, 
Hangmatana= "F\&ce of Assembly"; 'Ay^drava, 
Agbdtana, in Herodotus; 'E/c;8tiTiira, Ekbdtana, 
Xenophon, etc; so 1 Esd 6 23; Tob 3 7; 6 5; 
7 1; 14 12.14; Jth 1 1.2.14; 2 Mace 9 3; Talm 

'i'^lptl, hamddn; now jjltX+fC, hamadan): This, 

the ancient capital of Media, stood (lat. 34° 60' N. — - 
long. 48° 32' E.) near the modern 

1. Location Hamadan, 160 miles W.S.W. of Tehran, 

almost 6,000 feet above the sea, cir 1| 
miles from the foot of Mt. Orontes (Alvand). 

It was founded or rebuilt by Deiokes (Dayaukku) 
about 700 BC on the site of EUippi an ancient city 

of the Manda, and captured by Cyrus 

2. History 549 BC who brought Croesus there 

as captive (Herodotus i.l63). It was 
the capital of the 10th Nome under Darius I. 
Cyrus and other Pers kings used to spend the two 
summer months there yearly, owing to the compara- 
tive coolness of the climate. Herodotus describes 
it as a magnificent city fortified with seven concen- 
tric walls (i.98). Its citadel QnrHha', Ezr 6 2, 
wrongly rendered "palace" in RV) is mentioned by 
Arrian, who says that, when Alexander took the 
cit;^ in 324 BC, he there stored his enormous booty. 
In it the royal archives were kept. It stood on a 
hill, where later was built a temple of Mithra. 
Polybius (x.27) speaks of the great strength of the 
citadel. Though the city was unwalled in his time, 
he can hardly find words to express his admi- 
ration for it, especially for the magnificent royal 
palace, nearly 7 stadia in circumference, built of 
precious kinds of wood sheathed in plates of gold 
and silver. In the city was the shrine of Aine 
(Nanaea, Anahita?). Alexander is said to have 
destroyed a temple of ^sculapius (Mithra?) 
there. Diodorus tells us the city was 250 stadia 
in circumference. On Mt. Alvand (10,728 feet) 
there have been found inscriptions of Xerxes. 
Doubtless Ecbatana was one of the "cities of the 
Medes" to which Israel was carried captive (2 K 
17 6). It should be noted that Gr writers mention 
several other Ecbatanas. One of these, afterward 
called Gazaca (Takhti Sulaiman, a little S of 
Lake UrmI, lat. 36° 28' N., long. 47° 9' E.) was 
capital of Atropatene. It was almost destroyed 
by the Mughuls ia the 12th cent. Sir H. Rawlia- 




son identifies the Ecbatana of Tobit and Herodotus 
with this northern city. The southern and far 
more important Ecbatana which we have described 
is certainly that of 2 Mace 9 3. It was Cyrus' 
Median capital, and is doubtless that of Ezr 6 2. 
Classical writers spoke erroneously of Ecbatana (for 
Ecbatana) as moderns too often do of Hamad&n 
for Hamadan. 

Hamadan has perhaps never fully recovered from 
the fearful massacre made there in 1220 AD by 
the Mongols, but its population is 
3. Present about 50,000, including a considerable 
Condition number of descendants of the Israel- 
ites of the Dispersion (tracing descent 
from Asher, Naphtali, etc). They point to the 
tombs of Esther and Mordecai in the neighborhood. 
It is a center for the caravan trade between Bagh- 
dad and Tehran. There is an American Presby- 
terian mission at work. 

Authorities (besides those quoted above) : Ctesias, 
Curtius, Amm. Marcellinus, Pausanias, Strabo, 
Diod. Siculus; Ibnu'l Athir, Yaqut, Jahangusha, 
JSmi'u't Tawarikh, and modern travelers. 

W. St. Claie Tisdall 

ACHO, ak'o. See Acco. 

ACHOR, a'kor ("I'l^y, 'akhor, "trouble," the 
idea Of the word being that of trouble which is 
serious and extreme. See Achan): The place 
where Achan was executed in the time of Joshua 
(Josh 7 24.26). In all the five places where it is 
mentioned it is described as the 'emel!:, the arable 
valley of Achor. There is no ground in the record 
for the current idea that it must have been a 
locality with horrid and dismal physical features. 
It was on a higher level than the camp of Israel 
in the Jordan valley, and on a lower level than 
Debir — a different Debir from that of Josh 15 15. 
In a general way, as indicated by the points men- 
tioned in the border of Judah, it was north of Beth- 
arabah, and south of Debir (Josh 7 24; 15 7). 
Many identify it with the Wady Kelt which de- 
scends through a deep ravine from the Judaean 
hills and runs between steep banks south of the 
modern Jericho to Jordan, the stream after rains 
becoming a foaming torrent. Possibly the name 
may have been applied to a region of considerable 
extent. In Isa 65 10 it is a region on the east side 
of the mountain ridge which is in some sense bal- 
anced with Sharon on the west side. By imphcation 
the thing depicted seems to be these rich agricul- 
tural localities so far recovered from desolation as 
to be good grounds for cattle and sheep. Hosea 
recognizes the comforting aspect of the dreadful 
affair in the valley of Achor; it was a doorway of 
hope to pardoned Israel (Hos 2 15 [17]), and he 
hopes for like acceptance for the Israel of his own 
(Jay. Willis J. Beecher 

ACHSA, ak'sa: Used in AV in 1 Ch 2 49 for 

AcHSAH, which see. 

ACHSAH, ak'sa (nOD? , 'akh^ah; in some copies 
SDDy, 'akh?a' in 1 Ch 2 49), "anklet"): The 
daughter of Caleb whom he gave in marriage to 
his younger kinsman Othniel the son of Kenaz, 
as a reward for smiting Kiriath-sepher (Josh 15 
16 ff- Jgs 1 12 ff). Caleb, the narrative says, 
estabUshed Achsah in the South-country, and in 
addition, at her asking, gave her certain important 
springs of water— the "upper basins' and the 
"nether basins." Professor G. F. Moore identifies 
these with the groups of springs in Seit ed-Uitbeh. 
(notes on Jgs in Polychrome Bible). 
^ Willis J. Beecher 

ACHSHAPH, ak'shaf (P'p^^> 'akhshaph, "sor- 
cery," or "fascination") : A city in the northern 

part of the territory conquered by Joshua. The 
king of Achshaph was a member of the coalition 
against Israel under Jabin and Sisera. It is men- 
tioned with Hazor, Megiddo, Taanaoh, etc, in the 
list of conquered kings. It is one of the cities 
marking the boundaries of the tribe of Asher 
(Josh 11 1; 12 20; 19 25). Several attempts have 
been made to identify the site of it, but explorers 
are not agreed as to the identification. 

ACHZIB, ak'zib (3''T3«, 'akhzlbh, "lying" or 
"disappointing"): The name of two towns in 
Palestine: (1) A town in western Judah in the 
lowlands, mentioned in connection with Mareshah 
and Keilah as one of the cities allotted to Judah 
(Josh 15 44), and in Mio (1 14), where it suggests 
play upon its meaning, "deceptive" or "failing," 
possibly the place having received its name from 
a winter spring or brook, which failed in summer. 
It is also called Chezib (3iT3, k'^zibh [Gen 38 5]), 
where Judah was at the time of the birth of his son 
Shelah. In 1 Ch 4 22 it is called Cozeba, AV 
"Chozeba" (i53T3 , kozebha'), clearly seen to be the 
same as Achzib, from the places with which it is 
grouped. (2) It has been identified with the 
modern ^Ayin-Kezbeh in the valley of Elah, and 
north of Adullam. Edward Mack 

(3) Mod. Zib LXX variously: Josh 19 29, B, 
'ExoJdP, Echozob, A, 'AxS£t<J>, Achzeiph; Jgs 1 31, 
B, 'A.iT\al(l, Aschazel, A, 'A<r\iv5il, Aschendei; 
Gr Ecdippa: A small town some miles north of Acre 
on the coast. It is mentioned in Josh 19 29 as 
falling within the possessions of the tribe of Asher, 
but they never occupied it, as they did not the neigh- 
boring Acre (Acco). The Phoen inhabitants of the 
coast were too strongly entrenched to be driven out 
by a people who had no fleet. The cities on the 
coast doubtless aided one another, and Sidon had 
become rich and powerful before this and could 
succor such a small town in case of attack. Achzib 
was a coast town, nine miles north of Acco, now 
known as Ez-Zib. It appears in the Assyr inscrip- 
tions as Aksibi and Sennacherib enumerates it 
among the Phoen towns that he took at the same 
time as Acco (702 BC). It was never important 
and is now an insignificant village among the sand 
dunes of the coast. It was the bordertown of Galilee 
on the west, what lay beyond being unholy ground. 

H. Porter 

ACIPHA, as'i-fa. See Achiphah. 

ACITHO, ACITHOH, as'i-tho (variant of AHI- 
TUB): The name in AV of an ancestor of Judith 
(Jth 8 1). 

ACKNOWLEDGE, ak-nol'ej (vivviSo-kw, gignd- 
sJw) : To declare that one recognizes the claims of 
a person or thing fully established. Both in OT 
and NT expressed by various forms of the word 
"know" (Prov 3 6; Isa 61 9; Col 2 2 AV). The 
Psalmist (Ps 32 5) "acknowledged" his sin, when 
he told God that he knew the guilt of what he had 
done. The Corinthians (2 Cor 1 14) "acknowl- 
edged" Paul and his companions when they formally 
recognized their claims and authority. 

kwan'tans (-yvucrToC, gnostoi): Terms referring to 
various degrees of knowledge, but implying more 
or less detailed information; applied to God's 
omniscience (Ps 139 3), to the grief of the Suffer- 
ing Servant of Jehovah (Isa 53 3), and to the 
knowledge which man should have of God. The 
noun in the concrete, unless limited by a quali- 
fying term, means more than one who has been 
I known simply in passing, and implies a degree of 




intimacy, as may be seen in Lk 2 44; 23 49; 
2 K 12 5. H. E. Jacobs 

ACRA, ak'ra, a'kra (1 Maec 1 33 RV, "cita- 
del"). See Jerusalem. 

ACRABATTENE, ak-ra-ba-te'ne. See Akrabat- 

TINE (Apoc). 

ACRABBIM, ak-rab'im: Incorrect translitera- 
ation of D^'S'lpy '^alfrabttm, of Josh 15 3 in AV. 
See Akrabbim. 

ACRE, a'ker, a'ker. See Acco. 

ACRE, a'ker (1^^, femedh): A term of land- 
measurement used twice in the English VSS of the 
Bible (Isa 5 10; IS 14 14), and said to be the 
only term in square measure found in the OT. The 
Eng. word "acre" originally signified field. Then it 
came to denote the measure of land that an ox team 
could plow in a day, and upon the basis of a maximum 
acre of this kind the standard acre of 160 square rods 
(with variations in different regions) was fixed. The 
Heb word tr^ acre denotes a yoke of animals, in the 
sense of a team, a span, a pair; it is never used to 
denote the yoke by which the team are coupled to- 
gether. The phrase 'ten yokes of vineyard' (Isa 6 
10) may naturally mean vineyard covering as much 
land as a team would plow in ten days, though other 
plausible meanings can also be suggested. In 1 S 
14 14 the same word is used in describing the hmits 
of space within which Jonathan and his armor-bearer 
slew twenty Phihstines. The tr of RV, ' 'within as it 
were halt a furrow's length in an acre of land," 
means, strictly, that they were slain along a line from 
two to twenty rods in length. The word rendered 
"furrow," used only here and in Ps 129 3, is in 
Brown's Hebrew Lexicon defined as "plowing- 
ground." This gives the rendering "as it were in 
half a plo wing-stint, a yoke of ground," the last 
two phrases defining each the other, so that the 
meaning is substantially that of the paraphrase 
in AV. There is here an alleged obscurity and 
uncertainty in the text, but it is not such as to 
affect either the tr or the nature of the event. 

Willis J. Beecher 

ACROSTIC, a-kros'tik: The acrostic, understood 
as a short poem in which the first letters of the 
hues form a word, or name, or sentence, has not 
yet been proved to occur in ancient Heb literature. 
The supposed examples found by some scholars in 
Ps 2 1-4 and 110 16—4 are not generally recog- 
nized. Still less can be said in favor of the suggestion 
that in Est 1 20 four words read from left to right 
form by their initials an acrostic on the name 
YHWH (cf Konig, EM 293). In Byzantine 
hymn-poetry the term acroslichis with which our 
word "acrostic" is connected was also used of alpha- 
betical poems, that is poems the lines or groups of 
lines in which have their initials arranged in the 
order of the alphabet. Acrostics of this kind are 
found in pre-Christian Heb Uterature as well as 
elsewhere in ancient oriental literature. There are 
twelve clear instances in the OT: Pss26, 34, 37, 
lllf, 119, 145; Prov 31 10-31, and Lam 1-4. 
There is probably an example in Pss 9 and 10, and 
possibly another in Nah 1 2-10. Outside the 
Canon, Sir 51 13-30 exhibits clear traces of 
alphabetic arrangement. Each of these fifteen 
poems must briefly be discussed. 

Pss 9 and 10, which are treated as one psalm in 
LXX and Vulg, give fairly clear indications of 
original alphabetic structure even in the MT. 
The initials of 9 1.3.5 are respectively 'dleph, 
huh, gimel; of vs vav, zayin, helh, 
teth and yodh. The first ver of 10 begins with 
Idmedh and vs with koph, resh, shin and 

tav. Four hnes seem to have been allotted to each 
letter in the original form of the poem. In Ps 26 
all the letters are represented except vav and i^ph. 
In ver 18 we find resh instead of the latter as well 
as in its place in ver 19. In ver 2 the alphabetical 
letter is the initial of the second word. The last 
verse is a supernumerary. There are mostly two 
lines to a letter. In Ps 34 all the letters are repre- 
sented except vav, ver 6 beginning not with it, as 
was to be expected, but with zayin. The last 
verse is again a supernumerary. Since here and in 
26 22 the fiist word is a form of padhah it has been 
suggested that there may have been here a sort of 
acrostic on the writer's name Pedahel (p^dhah'el), 
but there is no evidence that a psahnist so named 
ever existed. There are two lineis to a letter. In 
Ps 37 all the letters are represented except 'ayin 
which seems however from LXX to have been 
present in the earliest text. As a rule four Unes are 
assigned to each letter. In Pss 111 f are found two 
quite regular examples with a line to each letter. 
Ps 119 offers another regular example, but with 16 
lines to a letter, each alternate fine beginning with 
its letter. Vs 1-8, for instance, each begin with 
'dleph. In Ps 145 are found all the letters but nUn. 
As we find in LXX between vs 13 and 14, that is 
where the nUn couplet ought to be : 

"Faithful is the Lord in his words 
And holy In his works," 

which may represent a Heb couplet beginning 
with nUn, it would seem that a ver has dropped out 
of the MT. Prov 31 10-31 constitutes a regular 
alphabetical poem with (except in ver 15) two hnes 
to a letter. Lam 1 is regular, with three hnes to 
a letter. Lam 2,3,4, are also regular with a 
curious exception. In each case pe precedes 'ayin, a 
phenomenon which has not yet been explained. In 2 
there are three or four Unes to a letter except in ver 17, 
where there seem to be five. In 3 also there are 
three lines to a letter and each fine begins with that 
letter. In 4 there are two hnes to a letter except in 
ver 22 where there are probably four hnes. Lam 6 
has twice as many hnes as the letters of the alphabet 
but no alphabetical arrangement. In Nah 1 1-10 ff 
Delitzsch (following Frohnmeyer) in 1876, Bickell 
in 1880 and 1894, Gunkel in 1893 and 1895, G. B. 
Gray in 1898 (Expos, September) and others 
have pointed out possible traces of original alpha- 
betical structure. In the Massoretic text, however, 
as generally arranged, it is not distinctly discernible. 
Sir 51 13-30: As early as 1882 Bickell reconstructed 
this hymn on the basis of the Gr and Syr VSS as a 
Heb alphabetical poem. In 1897 Schechter (in 
the judgment of most scholars) discovered the 
original text in a collection of fragments from the 
Genizah of Cairo, and this proved the correctness 
of Bickell's idea and even the accuracy of some 
details of his reconstruction. The poem begins 
with 'dleph and has tdv as the initial letter of the 
last line but one. In vs the 
letters mem, nun, 'ayin, pe, gadhe, Ifoph and resh 
can be traced at the beginnings of lines in that 
order. Samekh is absent (cf Schechter-Taylor, 
The Wisdom of Ben Sira, Ixxvi-lxxxvii). 

As this rapid survey will have shown, this form 
of acrostic as employed by Heb writers consisted 
in the use of letters of the alphabet as initials in 
their order, at regular intervals, the distance 
between two different letters ranging from one to 
sixteen lines. Once each letter is thus used three 
times, in another case eight times. The corruption 
of the text has in some cases led to considerable 
interference with the alphabetical arrangement, 
and textual criticism has endeavored to restore it 
with varying success. 

These alphabetical poems have been unduly 
depreciated on account of their artificial structure 





and have also been regarded for the same reason as 
of comparatively late origin. This latter conclusion 
is premature with present evidence. The poems 
in Lam undoubtedly go back as far as the 6th cent. 
BC, and Assyr testimony takes us back farther still 
for acrostic poems of some kind. Strictly alphabeti- 
cal poems are of course out of the question in Assyr 
because of the absence of an alphabet, but there are 
texts from the library of Ashur-bani-pal each 
verse-line in which begins with the same syllable, 
and others in which the initial syllables read together 
compose a word or sentence. Now these texts 
were written down in the 7th cent. BC, but may 
have been copied from far earlier Bab originals. 
There can be httle doubt that oriental poets wrote 
acrostic at an early period, and therefore the use 
of some form of the acrostic is no clear indication 
of lateness of date. (For these Assyr acrostics 
cf Weber, Die Literatur der Babylonier und Assyrer, 

LiTBEATORE. — In addition to authorities already cited: 
Konig, Binl, 58, 66, 74, 76, 399, 404, 419, and SliUstik, 
etc, .^57 ff; Budde, Geschichte der alt-hebrdischen Littera- 
tur, 30, 90. 241, 291; art. "Acrostic" inHDB (larger and 
smaller) and Hastings, Enc of Religion and Ethica, and 
Jew Enc; commentaries on Ps, Nah, Prov and Lam; 
Driver, Parallel Psalter; King, Early Religious Poetry of 
the Hebrews, ch iv. 

William Taylor Smith 

ACTS, APOCRYPHAL, a-pok'ri-fal. See Apoc- 
ryphal Acts. 

I. Title 
II. Text 

m. Unity of the Book 

IV. The Author 
V. Canonicity 

VI. Date 
VII. Sources Used by Luke 
VIII. The Speeches in the Acts 

IX. Relation of the Acts to the Epistles 
X. Chronology of Acts 

XI. Historical Worth of Acts 
XII. Purpose of the Book 
XIII. Analysis 

1. Title. — It is possible, indeed probable, that the 
book originally had no title. The manuscripts 
give the title in several forms. Aleph (in the 
inscription) has merely "Acts" {Prdxeis). So 
Tischendorf, while Origen, Didymus, Eusebius 
quote from "The Acts." But BD Aleph (in sub- 
scription) have "Acts of Apostles" or "The Acts of 
the Apostles" (Prdxeis AposUlon). So Westcott 
and Hort, Nestle (cf Athanasius and Euthalius). 
Only slightly different is the title in 31.61, and many 
other cursives {Praxeis ton Apostolon, "Acts 
of the Apostles"). So Griesbach, Scholz. Several 
fathers (Clement of Alex, Origen, Dionysius of 
Alex, Cyril of Jerus, Chrysostom) quote it as 
"The Acts of the Apostles" [Hai Praxeis ton 
Apostolon). Finally A^ EGH give it in the form 
"Acts of the Holy Apostles" (Praxeis ton Hagion 
Apostolon). The Memphitic VS has "The Acts of 
the Holy Apostles." Clearly, then, there was no 
single title that commanded general acceptance. 

//. Text. — (1) The chief documents. These are 
the Primary Uncials (S A BCD), E which is a 
bilmgual Uncial confined to Acts, later Uncials like 
HLP, the Cursives, the Vulgate, the Pesh and the 
JIarclean Syriac and quotations from the Fathers. 
We miss the Curetonian and Syr Sm, and have 
only fragmentary testimony from the Old Latm. 

(2) The modem editions of Acts present the 
types of text (TR; RV; the critical text like that 
of WH or Nestle or Weiss or von Soden). These 
three types do not correspond with the four classes 
of text (Syrian, Western, Alexandrian, Neutral) 
outlined by Hort in his Introduction to the New Tes- 
tament in Greek (1882). These four classes are 
broadly represented in the documents which give 

us Acts. But no modern editor of the Gr NT has 
given us the Western or the Alex type of text, 
though Bornemann, as will presently be shown, 
argues for the originality of the Western type in 
Acts. But the TR (Stephanus' 3d ed in 1550) 
was the basis of the AV of 1611. This ed of the 
Gr NT made use of a very few MSS, and all of them 
late, except D, which was considered too eccentric 
to follow. Practically, then, the AV represents 
the Syr type of text which may have been edited 
in Antioch in the 4th cent. Various minor errors 
may have crept in since that date, but substantially 
the Syr recension is the text of the AV today. 
Where this text stands alone, it is held by nearly 
all modern scholars to be in error, though Dean 
Burgon fought hard for the originality of the Syr 
text [The Revision Revised, 1882). The text of WH 
is practically that of B, which is held to be the Neu- 
tral type of text. Nestle, von Soden, Weiss do not 
differ greatly from the text of WH, though von 
Soden and Weiss attack the problem on independent 
lines. The text of the RV is in a sense a compromise 
between that of the AV and the critical text, 
though coming pretty close to the critical text. 
Cf Whitney, The Reviser's Greek Text, 1892. For a 
present-day appreciation of this battle of the texts 
see J. Rendel Harris, Side Lights on the New Tes- 
tament, 1908. For a detailed comparison between 
the AV and the RV Acts see Rackham, The Ads of 
the Apostles, xxii. 

(3) In Acts the Western type of text has its chief 
significance. It is the merit of the late Friedrich 
Blass, the famous classicist of Germany, to have 
shown that in Luke's writings (Gospel and Acts) 
the Western class (especially D) has its most marked 
characteristics. This fact is entirely independent 
of the theory advanced by Blass which will be dis- 
cussed directly. The chief modern revolt against 
the theories of WH is the new interest felt in the 
value of the Western type of text. In particular 
D has come to the front in the Book of Acts. The 
feeble support that D has in its peculiar readings 
in Acts (due to absence of Cur. Syr and of Old Lat) 
makes it difficult always to estimate the value 
of this document. But certainly these readings 
deserve careful consideration, and some of them may 
be correct, whatever view one holds of the D text. 
The chief variations are, as is usual with the Western 
text, additions and paraphrases. Some of the 
prejudice against D has disappeared as a result of 
modern discussion. 

(4) Bornemann in 1848 argued that D in Acts 
represented the original text. But he has had very 
few followers. 

(5) J. Rendel Harris (1891) sought to show that 
D (itself a bilingual MS) had been Latinized. He 
argued that already in 150 AD a bifingual MS 
existed. But this theory has not won a strong 

(6) Chase (1893) sought to show that the pecul- 
iarities were due to tr from the Syr. 

(7) Blass in 1895 created a sensation by arguing 
in his Commentary on Acts (Acta Apostolorum, 
24 ff) that Luke had issued two editions of the 
Acts, as he later urged about the Gospel of Luke 
(Philology of the GospeU, 1898). In 1896 Blass 
puljlished this Roman form of the text of Acts 
(Acta Apostolorum, secundum Formam quae videtur 
Romanam) . Blass calls this first, rough, unabridged 
copy of Acts ^ and considers that it was issued at 
Rome. The later edition, abridged and revised, he 
calls a. Curiously enough, in Acts 11 28, D has 
"when we had gathered together," making Luke • 
present at Antioch. The idea of two edd is not 
wholly original with Blass. Leclerc, a Dutch 
philologist, had suggested the notion as early as 
the beginning of the 18th cent. Bishop Light- 




foot had also mentioned it {On a Fresh, Revision 
of the NT, 29). But Blass worked the matter 
out and challenged the world of scholarship with 
his array of arguments. He has not carried his 
point with all, though he has won a respectable 
following. Zahn {Einl, II, 338 if, 1899) had 
abeady been working toward the same view (348). 
He accepts in the main Blass's theory, as do Belser, 
Nestle, Salmon, Zockler. Blass acknowledges his 
debt to Corssen {Der cyprianische Text der Acta 
Apostolorum, 1892), but Corssen considers the a 
text as the earlier and the /3 text as a later revision. 

(8) Hilgenfeld (Acta Apostolorum, etc, 1899) ac- 
cepts the notion of two edd, but denies identity of 

(9) Schmiedel {EB) vigorously and at much length 
attacks Blass's position, else "the conclusions reached 
in the foregoing sections would have to be with- 
drawn." He draws his conclusions and then 
demohshes Blass! He does find weak spots in 
Blass's armor as others have done (B. Weiss, Der 
Codex D in der Apostelgeschichte, 1897; Page, Class. 
Rev., 1897; Harnack, The Acts of the Apostles, 1909, 
45). See also Knowling, The Acts of the Apostles, 
1900, 47, for a sharp indictment of Blass's theory 
as being too simple and lacking verification. 

(10) Harnack (The Acts of the Apostles, 48) doubts 
if Luke himself formally published the book. He 
thinks that he probably did not give the book a final 
revision, and that friends issued two or more edd. He 
considers that the so-called ^ recension has a "series 
of interpolations" and so is later than the a text. 

(11) Ramsay {The Church in the Roman Empire, 
150; St. Paul the Traveller, 27; Expos, 1895) 
considers the P text to be a 2d-cent. revision by a 
copyist who has preserved some very valuable 2d- 
cent. testimony to the text. 

(12) Headlam (HDB) does not beheve that the 
problem has as yet been scientifically attacked, 
but that the solution lies in the textual license 
of scribes of the Western type (cf Hort, Introduction, 
122 B). But Headlam is still shy of "Western" 
readings. The fact is that the Western readings are 
sometimes correct as against the Neutral (cf*' Mt 
27 49). It is not necessary in Acts 11 20 to say 
that Hellenas is in Western authorities (AD, etc) 
but is not a Western reading. It is at any rate too 
soon to say the final word about the text of Acts, 
though on the whole the a text still holds the field 
as against the /3 text. The S3t: text is, of course, 
later, and out of court. 

///. Unity of the Book. — It is not easy to discuss 
this question, apart from that of authorship. But 
they are not exactly the same. One may be con- 
vinced of the unity of the book and yet not credit it 
to Luke, or, indeed, to anyone in the 1st cent. Of 
course, if Luke is admitted to be the author of the 
book, the whole matter is simplified. His hand is 
in it all whatever sources he used. If Luke is not 
the author, there may still have been a competent 
historian at work, or the book may be a mere com- 
pilation. The first step, therefore, is to attack the 
problem of unity. Holtzmann {Einl, 383) holds 
Luke to be the author of the "we" sections only. 
Schmiedel denies that the Acts is written by a com- 
panion of Paul, though it is by the same author as 
the Gospel bearing Luke's name. _ In 1845 Schleier- 
maoher credited the "we" sections to Timothy, 
not to Luke. For a good sketch of the theories 
of "sources," see Knowling on Acts, 25 ff. Van 
Manen (1890) resolved the book into two parts, 
Acta Petri and Acta Pauli, combined by a redactor. 
Sorof (1890) ascribes one source to Luke, one to 
Timothy. Spitta also has two sources (a Pauline- 
Lukan and a Jewish-Christian) worked over by a 
redactor. Clemen (1905) has four sources (History 
of the Hellenists, History of Peter, History of Paul, 

and a Journey of Paul), all worked over by a series 
of editors. Hilgenfeld (1895) has three sources 
(Acts of Peter, Acts of the Seven, Acts of Paul). 
Jungst (1895) has a Pauline source and a Petrine 
source. J. Weiss (1893) admits sources, but claims 
that the book has unity and a definite aim. B. 
Weiss (1902) conceives an early source for the first 
part of the book. Harnack {The Acts of the Apostles, 
1909, 41 f) has small patience with all this blind 
criticism: "With them the book passes as a compara- 
tively late patchwork compilation, in which the 
part taken by the editor is insignificant yet in all 
cases detrimental; the 'we' sections are not the 
property of the author, but an extract from a source, 
or even a literary fiction." He charges the critics 
with "airy conceit and lofty contempt." Harnack 
has done a very great service in carefully sifting 
the matter in his Luke the Physician (1907). He 
gives detailed proof that the "we" sections are in 
the same style and by the same author as the rest 
of the book (26-120). Harnack does not claim 
originality, in this hne of argument: "It has been 
often stated and often proved that the 'we' sections 
in vocabulary, in syntax, and in style are most 
intimately bound up with the whole work, and that 
this work itself (including the Gospel), in spite 
of all diversity in its parts, is distinguished by a 
grand unity of literary form" {Luke the Physician, 
26). He refers to the "splendid demonstration of 
this unity" by Klostermann ( Vindiciae Lucanae, 
1866), to B. Weiss, who, in his commentary (1893, 
2 Aufl, 1902) "has done the best work in demon- 
strating the literary unity of the whole work," to 
"the admirable contributions" of Vogel {Zur 
Charakteristik des Lukas, etc, 2 Aufl, 1899) to the 
"yet more careful and minute investigations" of 
Hawkins {Horae Synopticae, 1899, 2d ed, 1909), to 
the work of Hobart {The Medical Language of 
St. Luke, 1882), who "has proved only too much" 
{Luke the Physician, 175), but "the evidence is 
of overwhelming force" (198). Harnack only 
claims for himself that he has done the work in 
more detail and with more minute accuracy with- 
out claiming too much (27). But the conversion 
of Harnack to this view of Acts is extremely sig- 
nificant. It ought not to be necessary any more 
to refute the partition theories of the book, or to 
set forth in detail the proofs for the unity of the 
book. Perhaps the compilation theory of Acts 
is nowhere set forth more cogently than in Mc- 
Giifert's The Apostolic Age (1897). See a powerful 
refutation of his argument by Ramsay in Pauline 
and Other Studies (1906, 302-21). "I think his 
clever argumentation is sophistical" (305). Harnack 
is fully aware that he has gone over to the side of 
"Ramsay, Weiss and Zahn": "The results at which 
I have arrived not only approach very nearly to, 
but are often coincident with, the results of their re- 
search" {The Acts of the Apostles, 302). He is afraid 
that if these scholars failed to get the ear of critics 
"there is little prospect of claiming the attention 
of critics and compelling them to reconsider their 
position." But he has the advantage of coming to 
this conclusion from the other side. Moreover, 
if Harnack was won by the force of the facts, others 
may be. This brief sketch of Harnack's experience 
may take the place of detailed presentation of the 
arguments for the unity of the book. Harnack sets 
forth in great wealth of detail the characteristic 
idioms of the "we" sections side by side with paral- 
lels in other parts of Acts and the Gospel of Luke. 
The same man wrote the rest of Acts who wrote the 
"we" sections. This fact should now be acknowl- 
edged as proven. This does not mean that the 
writer, a personal witness in the "we" sections, had 
no sources for the other parts of Acts. This aspect 
of the matter will be considered a little later. 




IV. The Author. — Assuming the unity of the 
book, the argument runs as follows: The author 
was a companion of Paul. The "we" sections prove 
that (Acts 16 10-17; 20 6-16; 21; 27; 28). These 
sections have the fulness of detail and vivid descrip- 
tion natural to an eye-witness. This companion 
was with Paul in the second missionary journey at 
Troas and at Philippi, joined Paul's party again 
at Philippi on the return to Jerusalem during the 
third tour, and probably remained with Paul till 
he went to Rome. Some of Paul's companions 
came to him at Rome: others are so described in 
the book as to preclude authorship. Aristarchus, 
Aquila and Priscilla, Erastus, Gaius, Mark, Silas, 
Timothy, Trophimus, Tychicus and others more or 
less insignificant from the point of view of connection 
with Paul (like Crescens, Demas, Justus, Linus, 
Pudens, Sopater, etc) are easily eliminated. Curi- 
ously enough Luke and Titus are not mentioned 
in Acts by name at all. They are distinct persons 
as is stated in 2 Tim 4 10 f . Titus was with Paul 
in Jerusalem at the conference (Gal 2 1) and was 
his special envoy to Corinth during the time of 
trouble there. (2 Cor 2 12 f; 12 18.) He was 
later with Paul in Crete (Titus 15). But the absence 
of mention of Titus in Acts may be due to the fact • 
that he was a brother of Luke (cf 2 Cor 8 18; 12 
18). So A. Souter in DCG, art. "Luke." If Luke 
is the author, it is easy to understand why his name 
does not appear. If Titus is his brother, the same 
explanation occurs. As between Luke and Titus 
the medical language of Acts argues for Luke. 
The writer was a physician. This fact Hobart {The 
Medical Language of St. Luke, 1882) has demon- 
strated. Cf Zahn, Einl, 2, 435 ff; Harnack's 
Luke the Physician, 177 ff. The arguments from 
the use of medical terms are not all of equal 
weight. But the style is colored at points by the 
language of a physician. The writer uses medical 
terms in a technical sense. This argument involves 
a minute comparison with the writings of physicians 
of the time. Thus in Acts 28 3 f kathdpto, ac- 
cording to Hobart (288), is used in the sense of 
poisonous matter invading the body, as in Diosco- 
rides. Animal. Ven. Proem. ■ So Galen, De Typis 
4 (VII, 467), uses it "of fever fixing on parts of the 
body." Cf Harnack, Luke the Physician, 177 i. 
Harnack agrees also that the terms of the diagnosis 
in Acts 28 8 "are medically exact and can be 
vouched for from medical hterature" (ib, 176 f). 
Hobart has overdone his argument and adduced 
many examples that are not pertinent, but a real 
residuum remains, according to Harnack. Then 
pimprasthai is a technical term for swelling. Let 
these serve as examples. The interest of the writer 
in matters of disease is also another indication; cf 
Lk 8 43. Now Luke was a companion of Paul 
during his later ministry and was a physician. 
(Col 4 14). Hence he fulfils all the requirements 
of the case. The argument thus far is only probable, 
it is true; but there is to be added the undoubted 
fact that the same writer wrote both Gospel and 
Acts (Acts 11). The direct allusion to the Gospel 
is reinforced by identity of style and method m the 
two books. The external evidence is clear on 
the matter. Both Gospel and Acts are credited 
to Luke the physician. The Muratonan canon 
ascribes Acts to Luke. By the end of the 2d cent, 
the authority of the Acts is as well established 
as that of the Gospel (Salmon, Introduction to the 
NT, 1885, 366). Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement 
of Alexandria, all call Luke the author of the book. 
The argument is complete. It is still further 
strengthened by the fact that the' point of view of 
the book is Pauline and by the absence of references 
to Paul's epistles. If one not Paul's companion 
had written Acts, he would certainly have made 

some use of them. Incidentally, also, this is an 
argument for the early date of the Acts. The 
proof that has won Harnack, the leader of the left 
in Germany, to the acknowledgment of the Lukan 
authorship of Acts ought to win all to this position. 

V. Canonicity. — The use of the Acts does not 
appear so early or so frequently as is true of the 
gospels and the Pauline epistles. The reason is 
obvious. The epistles had a special field and the 
gospels appealed to all. Only gradually would 
Acts circulate. At first we find literary allusions 
without the name of book or author. But Holtz- 
mann {EinL, 1892, 406) admits the use of Acts by 
Ignatius, Justin Martyr, Polycarp. The use of 
the Gospel according to Luke by "Tatian and Mar- 
cion really involves knowledge of the Acts. But 
in Irenaeus frequently (Adv. Haer., i. 23, 1, etc) 
the Acts is credited to Luke and regarded as Scrip- 
ture. The Canon of Muratori lists it as Scripture. 
Tertullian and Clement of Alexandria attribute 
the book to Luke and treat it as Scripture. By 
the time of Eusebius the book is generally acknowl- 
edged as part of the canon. Certain of the hereti- 
cal parties reject it (like the Ebionites, Marcionites, 
Manichaeans). But by this time the Christians 
had come to lay stress on history (Gregory, 
Canon and Text of the NT, 1907, 184), and the 
place of Acts is now secure in the canon. 

VI. Date. — (1) Luke's relations to Josephus. 
The acceptance of the Lukan authorship settles the 
question of some of the dates presented by critics. 
Schmiedel places the date of Acts between 105 and 
130 AD {EB). He assumes as proven that Luke 
made use of the writings of Jos. It has never been 
possible to take with much seriousness the claim 
that the Acts shows acquaintance with Jos. See 
Keim, Geschichte Jesu, III, 1872, 134, and Krenkel, 
Josephus und Lucas, 1894, for the arguments in 
favor of that position. The words quoted to prove 
it are in the main untechnical words of common use. 
The only serious matter is the mention of Theudas 
and Judas the Galilean in Acts 5 36 f and Josephus 
(Ant, XX, V, If). In Jos the names occur some 
twenty lines apart and the resemblance is only 
slight indeed. The use of peltho in connection with 
Theudas and apostesai concerning Judas is all 
that requires notice. Surely, then, two common 
words for "persuade" and "revolt" are not enough 
to carry conviction of the writer's use of Josephus. 
The matter is more than offset by the differences in 
the two reports of the death of Herod Agrippa I 
(Acts 12 19-23; Jos, Ant, XVIII, vi, 7; XIX, viii, 
2) . The argument about Jos may be definitely dis- 
missed from the field. With that goes all the ground 
for a 2d-cent. date. Other arguments have been 
adduced (see Holtzmann, Einl, 1892, 405) such as 
the use of Paul's epistles, acquaintance with Plu- 
tarch, Arrian and Pausanias, because of imitation 
in method of work (i.e. || lives of Peter and Paul, 
periods of history, etc), correction of Gal in Acts 
(for instance. Gal 1 17-24 and Acts 9 26-30; Gal 
2 1-10 and Acts 15 1-33). The parallel with Plu- 
tarch is fanciful, while the use of Paul's epistles 
is by no means clear, the absence of such use, indeed, 
being one of the characteristics of the book. The 
variation from Gal is far better explained on the 
assumption that Luke had not seen the epistles. 

(2) 80 AD is the limit if the book is to be credited 
to Luke. The majority of modern critics who 
accept the Lukan authorship place it between 70 
and 80 AD. So Harnack, Leohler, Meyer, Ramsay, 
Sanday, Zahn. This opinion rests mainly on the 
idea that the Gospel according to Luke was written 
after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. It 
is claimed that Lk 21 20 shows that this tragedy 
had ah-eady occurred, as compared with Mk 13 14 
and Mt 24 15. But the mention of armies is very 




general, to be sure. Attention is called also to the 
absence of the warning in Lk. Harnack (The Acts 
of the Apostles, 291 f) admits that the arguments in 
favor of the date 70-80 are by no means conclusive. 
He writes "to warn critics against a too hasty 
closing of the chronological question." In his new 
book (Neue UnlerSuchungen zur Apostelgeschichte, 
etc, 1911, S. 81) Harnack definitely accepts the date 
before the destruction of Jerus. Lightfoot would 
give no date to Acts because of the uncertainty 
about the date of the Gospel. 

(3) Before 70 AD. This date is supported by 
Blass, Headlam, Maclean, Rackham, Salmon. Har- 
nack, indeed, considers that "very weighty con- 
siderations" argue for the early date. He, as already 
stated, now takes his stand for the early date. It is 
obviously the simplest way to understand Luke's 
close of the Acts to be due to the fact that Paul was 
still in prison. Harnack contends that the efforts 
to explain away this situation are not "quite 
satisfactory or very illuminating." He does not 
mention Paul's death because he was still alive. 
The dramatic purpose to bring Paul to Rome is 
artificial. The supposition of a third book from 
the use of proton in Acts 1 1 is quite gratuitous, 
since in the Koine, not to say the earlier Greek, 
"first" was often used when only two were mentioned 
(cf "our first story" and "second story," "first 
wife" and "second wife"). The whole tone of the 
book is that which one would naturally have before 
64 AD. After the burning of Rome and the destruc- 
tion of Jerusalem the attitude maintained in the 
book toward Romans and Jews would have been 
very difficult unless the date was a long time after- 
ward. Harnack wishes "to help a doubt to its just 
dues." That "doubt" of Harnack is destined to 
become the certainty of the future. (Since this 
sentence was written Harnack has settled his own 
doubt.) The book will, I think, be finally credited 
to the time 63 AD in Rome. The Gospel of Luke 
will then naturally belong to the period of Paul's 
imprisonment in Caesarea. The judgment of Mof- 
fatt (Historical NT, 1901, 416) that "it cannot be 
earlier" than 80 AD is completely upset by the 
powerful attack of Harnack on his own previous 
position. See also Moffatt's Introduction to the Lit. 
of the NT (1911) and Koch's Die Abfassungszeit des 
lukanischen Geschichtswerkes (1911). 

VII. Sources Used by Lake. — If we now assume 
that Luke is the author of the Acts, the question 
remains as to the character of the sources used by 
him. One is at Hberty to appeal to Lk 1 1-4 for 
the general method of the author. He used both 
oral and written sources. In the Acts the matter 
is somewhat simplified by the fact that Luke was 
the companion of Paul for a considerable part of 
the narrative (the "we" sections, 16 11-17; 20 5; 
21 18; 27 and 28). It is more than probable that 
Luke was with Paul also during his last stay in 
Jerusalem and during the imprisonment at Caesarea. 
There is no reason to think that Luke suddenly left 
Paul in Jerusalem and returned to Caesarea only 
when he started to Rome (27 1). The absence of 
"we" is natm-al here, since it is not a narrative of 
travel, but a sketch of Paul's arrest and series of 
defences. The very abundance of material here, as 
in chs 20 and 21, argues for the presence of Luke. 
But at any rate Luke has access to Paul himself 
for information concerning this period, as was true of 
the second, from ch 13 to the end of the book. Luke 
was either present or he could have learned from 
Paul the facts used. He may have kept a travel 
diary, which was drawn upon when necessary. 
Luke could have taken notes of Paul's addresses 
in Jerus (ch 22) and Caesarea (chs 24-26). From 
these, with Paul's help, he probably composed the 
account of Paul's conversion (9 1-30). If, as I 

think is true, the book was written during Paul's 
first Roman imprisonment, Luke had the benefit 
of appeal to Paul at all points. But, if so, he was 
thoroughly independent in style and assimilated 
his materials like a true historian. Paul (and also 
Philip for part of it) was a witness to the events 
about Stephen in 6 8 — 8 1 and a participant of 
the work in Antioch (11 19-30). Phihp, the host 
of Paul's company (21 8) on the last journey to 
Jerusalem, was probably in Caesarea still during 
Paul's confinement there. He could have told 
Luke the events in 6 1-7 and 8 4-40. In Caesarea 
also the story of Peter's work may have been 
derived, possibly even from Cornelius himself (9 
32 — 11 18). Whether Luke ever went to Antioch 
or not we do not know (Codex Bezae has "we" 
in 11 28), though he may have had access to 
the Antioohian traditions. But he did go to Jerus. 
However, the narrative in ch 12 probably rests 
on the authority of John Mark (12 12.25), in whose 
mother's house the disciples were assembled. Luke 
was apparently thrown with Mark in Rome (Col 
4 10), if not before. For Acts 1-5 the matter 
does not at first seem so clear, but these chapters are 
not necessarily discredited on that account. It is 
remarkable, as ancient historians made so httle 
mention of their sources, that we can connect 
Luke in the Acts with so many probable fountains 
of evidence. Barnabas (4 36) was able to tell 
much about the origin of the work in Jerus. So 
could Mnason. Philip also was one of the seven 
(6 5; 21 8). We do not know that Luke met 
Peter in Rome, though that is possible. But 
during the stay in Jerusalem and Caesarea (two 
years) Luke had abundant opportunity to learn 
the narrative of the great events told in Acts 1-6. 
He perhaps used both oral and written sources for 
this section. One cannot, of course, prove by 
linguistic or historical arguments the precise nature 
of Luke's sources in Acts. Only in broad outlines 
the probable materials may be sketched. 

VIII. The Speeches in Acts. — This matter is 
important enough to receive separate treatment. 
Are the numerous speeches reported in Acts free 
compositions of Luke made to order A la Thucydi- 
des? Are they verbatim reports from notes taken 
at the time and literally copied into the narrative? 
Are they substantial reports incorporated with 
more or less freedom with marks of Luke's own 
style? In the abstract either of these methods was 
possible. The example of Thucydides, Xenophon, 
Livy and Jos shows that ancient historians did not 
scruple to invent speeches of which no report was 
available. There are not wanting those who accuse 
Luke of this very thing in Acts. The matter can 
only be settled by an appeal to the facts so far as 
they can be determined. It cannot be denied that 
to a certain extent the hand of Luke is apparent 
in the addresses reported by him in Acts. But 
this fact must not be pressed too far. It is not 
true that the addresses are all alike in style. It is 
possible to distinguish very clearly the speeches of 
Peter from those of Paul. Not merely is this true, 
but we are able to compare the addresses of both 
Paul and Peter with their epistles. It is not prob- 
able that Luke had seen these epistles, as will 
presently be shown. It is crediting remarkable 
hterary skill to Luke to suppose that he made up 
"Petrine" speeches and "Pauline" speeches with 
such success that they harmonize beautifully with 
the teachings and general style of each of these 
apostles. The address of Stephen differs also 
sharply from those of Peter and Paul, though we 
are not able to compare this report with any original 
work by Stephen himself. Another thing is true 
also, particularly of Paul's sermons. They are 
wonderfully suited to time, place and audience. 




They all have a distinct Pauline flavor, and yet a 
difference in local color that corresponds, to some 
extent, with the variations in the style of Paul's 
epistles. Professor Percy Gardner {The Speeches 
of St. Paul in Acts, in Cambridge Bibhcal Essays, 
1909) recognizes these differences, but seeks to 
explain them on the ground of varying accuracy in 
the sources used by Luke, counting the speech at 
Miletus as the most historic of all. But he admits 
the use of sources by Luke for these addresses. 
The theory of pure invention by Luke is quite 
discredited by appeal to the facts. On the other 
hand, in view of the apparent presence of Luke's 
style to some extent in the speeches, it can hardly 
be claimed that he has made verbatim reports. 
Besides, the report of the addresses of Jesus in 
Luke's Gospel (as in the other gospels) shows the 
same freedom in giving the substance without 
exact reproduction of the words that is found in 
Acts. Again, it seems clear that some, if not all, 
the reports in Acts are condensed, mere outlines in 
the case of some of Peter's addresses. The ancients 
knew how to make shorthand reports of such 
addresses. The oral tradition was probably active 
in preserving the early speeches of Peter and even 
of Stephen, though Paul himself heard Stephen. 
The speeches of Paul all show the marks of an eye- 
witness (Bethge, Die paulinischen Reden, etc, 174). 
For the speeches of Peter, Luke may have had 
documents, or he may have taken down the cur- 
rent oral tradition while he was in Jerusalem and 
Caesarea. Peter probably spoke in Greek on the 
day of Pentecost. His other addresses may have 
been in Aram, or in Gr. But the oral tradition would 
certainly carry them in Gr, if also in Aram. Luke 
heard Paul speak at Miletus (Acts 20) and may have 
taken notes at the time. So also he almost cer- 
tainly heard Paul's address on the steps of the 
Tower of Antonia (ch 22) and that before Agrippa 
(ch26). There is no reason to think that he was 
absent when Paul made his defences before Felix 
and Festus (chs 24-26) . He was present on the ship 
when Paul spoke (ch 27), and in Rome when he 
addressed the Jews (ch 28). Luke was not on hand 
when Paul delivered his sermon at Antioch in Pisid- 
ia (ch 13), or at Lystra (ch 14), or at Athens 
(ch 17). But these discourses differ so greatly in 
theme and treatment, and are so essentially Pauline 
that it is natural to think that Paul himself gave 
Luke the notes which he used. The sermon at 
Antioch in Pisidia is probably given as a sample 
of Paul's missionary discourses. It contains the 
heart of Paul's gospel as it appears in his epistles. 
He accentuates the death and resurrection of Jesus, 
remission of sins through Christ, justification by 
faith. It is sometimes objected that at Athens the 
address shows a breadth of view and sympathy 
unknown to Paul, and that there is a curious Attic 
tone to the Gr style. The sermon does go as far 
as Paul can (cf 1 Cor 9 22) toward the standpoint 
of the Greeks (but compare Col and Eph). How- 
ever, Paul does not sacrifice his principle of grace 
in Christ. He called the Athenians to repentance, 
preached the judgment for sin and announced the 
resurrection of Jesus from the dead. The father- 
hood of God and the brotherhood of man here 
taught did not mean that God winked at sin and 
could save all men without repentance and forgive- 
ness of sin. Chase {The Credibility of Acts) gives a 
collection of Paul's missionary addresses. The his- 
torical reality and value of the speeches in Acts may 
be said to be vindicated by modern scholarship. 
For a sympathetic and scholarly discussion of all of 
Paul's addresses see Jones, St. Paul the Orator 
(1910). The short speech of TertuUus (Acts 24) 
was made in public, as was the pubhc statement 
of Festus in ch 26. The letter of Claudius Lysias 

to Felix in ch 23 was a public document. How 
Luke got hold of the conversation about Paul 
between Festus and Agrippa in ch 26 is more 
difficult to conjecture. 

IX. Relation of Acts to the Epistles. — There is 
no real evidence that Luke made use of any of Paul's 
epistles. He was with Paul in Rome when Col 
was written (4 14), and may, indeed, have been 
Paul's amanuensis for this epistle (and for Eph and 
Philem). Some similarities to Luke's style have 
been pointed out. But Acts closes without any 
narrative of the events in Rome during the years 
there, so that these epistles exerted no influence 
on the composition of the book. As to the two 
preceding groups of Paul's epistles (1 and 2 Thess; 
1 and 2 Cor, Gal, Rom) there is no proof that Luke 
saw any of them. The Epistle to the Romans was 
probably accessible to him while in Rome, but he 
does not seem to have used it. Luke evidently 
preferred to appeal to Paul directly for information 
rather than to his epistles. This is all simple 
enough if he wrote the book or made his data while 
Paul was alive. But if Acts was written very late, 
it would be strange for the author not to have made 
use of some of Paul's epistles. The book has, 
therefore, the great advantage of covering some of 
the same ground as that discussed in the eariier 
epistles, but from a thoroughly independent stand- 
point. The gaps in our knowledge from the one 
source are often supplied incidentally, but most 
satisfactorily, from the other. The coincidences 
between Acts and Paul's epistles have been well 
traced by Paley in his Horae Paulinae, still a book 
of much value. Knowling, in his Witness of the 
Epistles (1892), has made a more recent study of 
the same problem. But for the apparent conflict 
between Gal 2 1-10 and Acts 16 the matter might ' 
be dropped at this point. It is argued by some that 
Acts, written long after Gal, brushes to one side 
the account of the Jerusalem conference given by 
Paul. It is held that Paul is correct in his personal 
record, and that Acts is therefore unhistorical. 
Others save the credit of Acts by arguing that Paul 
is referring to an earlier private conference some 
years before the public discussion recorded in Acts 
16. This is, of course, possible in itself, but it is 
by no means required by the variations between the 
two reports. The contention of Lightfoot has never 
been really overturned, that in Gal 2 1-10 Paul 
gives the personal side of the conference, not a 
fuU report of the general meeting. What Paul 
is doing is to show the Galatiahs how he is on a 
par with the Jerusalem apostles, and how his author- 
ity and independence were acknowledged by them. 
'This aspect of the matter came out in the private 
conference. Paul is not in Gal 2 1-10 setting forth 
his victory over the Judaizers in behaH of Gentile 
freedom. But in Acts 16 it is precisely this struggle 
for Gentile freedom that is under discussion. Paul's 
relations with the Jerusalem apostles is not the 
point at all, though it is plain in Acts that 
they agree. In Gal also Paul's victory for Gen- 
tile freedom comes out. Indeed, in Acts 16 it is 
twice mentioned that the apostles and elders were 
gathered together (vs 4. 6), and twice we are told 
that Paul and Barnabas addressed them (vs 4. 12). 
It is therefore natural to suppose that this private 
conference narrated by Paul in Gal came in between 
vs 5 and 6. Luke may not, indeed, have seen the 
Epistle to the Galatians, and may not have heard 
from Paul the story of the private conference, 
though he knew of the two public meetings. If 
he did know of the private meeting, he thought it 
not pertinent to his narration. There is, of course, 
no contradiction between Paul's going up by reve- 
lation and by appointment of the church in Antioch. 
In Gal 2 1 we have the second (Gal 1 18) visit to 




Jerusalem after his convereion mentioned by Paul, 
while that in Acts 15 is the third in Acts (9 28; 
H 29 f; 15 2). But there was no particular reason 
for Paul to mention the visit in Acts 11 30, which 
did not concern his relation to the apostles in 
Jerusalem. Indeed, only the "elders" are mentioned 
on this occasion. The same independence between 
Acts and Gal occurs in Gal 1 17-24, and Acts 9 
26-30. In Acts there is no allusion to the visit to 
Arabia, just as there is no mention of the private 
conference in Acts 15. So also in Acts 15 35-39 
there is no mention of the sharp disagreement be- 
tween Paul and Peter at Antioch recorded in Gal 
2 11 ff. Paul mentions it merely to prove his own 
authority and independence as an apostle. Lulce 
had no occasion to record the incident, if he was 
acquainted with the matter. These instances il- 
lustrate well how, when the Acts and the epistles 
vary, they really supplement each other. 

X. Chronology of Acts. — Here we confront one 
of the most perplexing questions in New Testament 
criticism. In general, ancient writers were not so 
careful as modern writers are to give precise dates 
for historical events. Indeed, it was not easy to 
do so in view of the absence of a uniform method 
of reckoning time. Luke does, however, relate 
his narrative to outward events at various points. 
In his Gospel he had linked the birth of Jesus with 
the names of Augustus as emperor and of Quirinius 
as governor of Syria (Lk 2 1 f), and the entrance 
of John the Baptist upon his ministry with the 
names of the chief Roman and Jewish rulers of the 
time (Lk 3 1 f ) . So also in the Acts he does not 
leave us without various notes of time. He does not, 
indeed, give the date of the Ascension or of the 
Crucifixion, though he places the Ascension forty 
days after the Resurrection (Acts 1 3), and the 
great Day of Pentecost would then come ten days 
later, "not many days hence" (1 5). But the 
other events in the opening chapters of Acts have 
no clear chronological arrangement. The career 
of Stephen is merely located '^n these days" (6 1). 
The beginning of the general persecution under 
Saul is located on the very day of Stephen's death 
(8 1), but the year is not even hinted at. The 
conversion of Saul comes probably in its chronologi- 
cal order in 9, but the year again is not given. We 
have no hint, as to the age of Saul at his conversion. 
So again the relation of Peter's work in Caesarea 

(10) to the preaching to the Greeks in Antioch 

(11) is not made clear, though probably in this 
order. It is only when we come to 12 that we reach 
an event whose date is reasonably certain. This 
is the death of Herod Agrippa I in 44 AD. But 
even so, Luke does not correlate the life of Paul 
with that incident. Ramsay {St. Paul the Traveller, 
49) places the persecution and death of James in 
44, and the visit of Barnabas and Saul to Jerusalem 
in 46. About 44, then, we may consider that Saul 
came to Antioch from Tarsus. The "fourteen 
years" in Gal 2 1, as already shown, probably 
point to the visit in Acts 15 some years later. But 
Saul had been in Tarsus some years and had spent 
some three years in Arabia and Damascus after 
his conversion (Gal 1 18). Beyond this it is 
not possible to go. We do not know the age of 
Saul in 44 AD or the year of his conversion. He 
was probably born not far from 1 AD. But if 
we locate Paul at Antioch with Barnabas in 44 AD, 
we can make some headway. Here Paul spent a 
year (Acts 11 26). The visit to Jerusalem in 11, 
the first missionary tour in 13 and 14, the conference 
at Jerusalem in 15, the second missionary tour in 
16-18, the third missionary tour and return to 
Jerusalem in 18-21, the arrest in Jerusalem and 
two years in Caesarea in 21-26, all come between 
44 AD and the recall of Felix and the coming of 

Festus. It used to be taken for granted that Festus 
came in 60 AD. Wieseler figured it out so from 
Josephus and was followed by Lightfoot. But 
Eusebius, in his "Chronicle," placed that event in 
the second year of Nero. That would be 56, unless 
Eusebius has a special way of counting those years. 
Mr. C. H. Turner (art. "Chronology" in HDB) 
finds that Eusebius counts an emperor's regnal 
year from the September following. If so, the date 
could be moved forward to 57 (cf Rackham on 
Acts, Ixvi) . But Ramsay (ch xiv, "Pauline Chronol- 
ogy," in Pauline and Other Studies) cuts the Gordian 
knot by showing an error in Eusebius due to his 
disregarding an interregnum with the reign of 
kings. Ramsay here follows Erbes (Todestage 
Pauli und Petri) in this discovery and is able to fix 
upon 59 as the date of the coming of Festus. Prob- 
ably 59 will have to answer as a compromise date. 
Between 44 AD and 59 AD, therefore, we place the 
bulk of Paul's active missionary work. Luke has 
divided this period into minor divisions with rela- 
tive dates. Thus a year and six months are men- 
tioned at Corinth (Acts 18 11), besides "yet many 
days" (18 18). In Ephesus we find mention of 
"three months" (19 8) and "two years" (19 10), 
the whole story summed up as "three years" (20 
31). Then we have the "two years" of delay in 
Caesarea (24 27). We thus have about seven of 
these fifteen years itemized. Much of the remain- 
ing eight was spent in the journeys described by 
Luke. We are told also the time of year when 
the voyage to Rome was under way (27 9), the 
length of the voyage (27 27), the duration of the 
stay in Mehta (28 11), and the time spent in Rome 
at the close of the book, "two whole years" (28 30). 
Thus it is possible to fix upon a relative schedule 
of dates, though not an absolute one. Harnack 
{The Acts of the Apostles, ch i, "Chronological 
Data") has worked out a very careful scheme for 
the whole of Acts. Knowhng has a good critical 
r6sum6 of the present state of our knowledge of the 
chronology of Acts in his Commentary, 38 ff; cf 
also Clemen, Die Chronologic der paulinischen Briefe 
(1893). It is clear, then, that a rational scheme for 
events of Paul's career so far as recorded in the Acts 
can be found. If 57 AD, for instance, should be 
taken as the year of Festus' coming rather than 59 
or 60 AD, the other dates back to 44 AD would, of 
course, be affected on a sliding scale. Back of 44 
AD the dates are largely conjectural. 

XI. Historical Worth of Acts. — It was once 
fashionable to discredit Acts as a book of no 
real value as history. The Tiibingen school re- 
garded Acts as "a late controversial romance, the 
only historical value of which was to throw light 
on the thought of the period which produced it" 
(Chase, The Credibility of Acts, 9). 'There are 
not wanting a few writers who still regard Acts as 
a late eirenicon between the Peter and Paul parties, 
or as a party pamphlet in the interest of Paul. 
Somewhat fanciful parallels are found between 
Luke's treatment of both Peter and Paul. "Accord- 
ing to Holtzmann, the strongest argument for the 
critical position is the correspondence between the 
acts of St. Peter and the other apostles on the one 
side and those of St. Paul on the other" (Headlam 
in HDB). But this matter seems rather far 
fetched. Peter is the leading figure in the early 
chapters, as Paul is in the latter half of the book, but 
the correspondences are not remarkably striking. 
There exists in some minds a prejudice against the 
book on the ground of the miracles recorded as 
genuine events by Luke. But Paul himself claimed 
to have wrought miracles (2 Cor 12 12). It is 
not scientific to rule a book out beforehand because 
it narrates miracles (Blass, Acta Apostolorum, 8). 
Ramsay {St. Paul the Traveller, 8) tells his experi- 




ence in regard to the trustworthiness of Acts: "I 
began with a mind unfavorable to it, for the in- 
genuity and apparent completeness of the Tubingen 
theory had at one time quite convinced me." It 
was by actual verification of Acts in points where it 
could be tested by inscriptions, Paul's epistles, or 
current non-Christian writers, that "it was gradually 
borne in upon me that in various details the narra- 
tive showed marvelous truth." He concludes by 
"placing this great writer on the high pedestal 
that belongs to him" (10). McGiifert {The Apos- 
tolic Age) had been compelled by the geographical 
and historical evidence to abandon in part the older 
criticism. He also admitted that the Acts "is 
more trustworthy than previous critics allowed" 
(Ramsay, Luke the Physician, 5). Schmiedel (EB) 
still argues that the writer of Acts is inaccurate 
because he was not in possession of full information. 
But on the whole Acts has had a triumphant 
vindication in modern criticism. Jtilicher (Einl, 
355) admits "a genuine core overgrown with 
legendary accretions" (Chase, Credibility, 9). The 
moral honesty of Luke, his fideUty to truth. (Raok- 
ham on Acts, 46), is clearly shown in both his Gospel 
and the Acts. This, after all, is the chief trait in 
the true historian (Ramsay, St. Paul the Traveller, 
4). Luke writes as a man of serious pmpose and 
is the one New Testament writer who mentions his 
careful use of his materials (Lk 1 1-4). His atti- 
tude and spirit are those of the historian. He 
reveals artistic skill, it is true, but not to the dis- 
credit of his record. He does not give a bare 
chronicle, but he writes a real history, an interpre- 
tation of the events recorded. He had adequate 
resources in the way of materials and endowment 
and has made conscientious and skilful use of his 
opportunity. It is not necessary here to give in 
detail all the points in which Luke has been vin- 
dicated (see Knowling on Acts, Ramsay's books and 
Harnack's Luke and Acts). The most obvious are 
the following: The use of "proconsul" instead of 
"propraetor" in Acts 13 7 is a striking instance. 
Curiously enough Cyprus was not a senatorial 
province very long. An inscription has been found 
in Cyprus "in the proconsulship of Paulus." The 
'first men' of Antioch in Pisidia is like the (13 50) 
"First Ten," a title which "was only given (as here) 
to a board of magistrates in Gr cities of the East" 
(MacLean in one-vol. HDB). The "priest of 
Jupiter" at Lystra (14 13) is in accord with the 
known facts of the worship there. So we have 
Perga in PamphyUa (13 13), Antioch in Pisidia 
13 14), Lystra and Derbe in Lycaonia (14 6), 
but not Iconium (14 1). In Phihppi Luke notes 
that the magistrates are called strategoi or praetors 
(16 20), and are accompanied by Uctors or rhah- 
douchoi (16 35). In Thessalonica the rulers are 
politarchs (17 6), a title found nowhere else, but 
now discovered on an inscription of Thessalonica. 
He rightly speaks of the Court of the Areopagus at 
Athens (17 19) and the proconsul in Achaia (18 
12). Though Athens was a free city, the Court of 
the Areopagus at the time were the real rulers. 
Achaia was sometimes associated with Macedonia, 
though at this time it was a separate senatorial 
province. In Ephesus Luke knows of the Asiarchs 
(19 31), "the presidents of the 'Common Council' 
of the province in cities where there was a temple of 
Rome and the Emperor; they superintended the 
worship of the Emperor" (Maclean). Note also 
the fact that Ephesus is "temple-keeper of the great 
Diana" (19 35). Then observe the town clerk 
(19 35), and the assembly (19 39). Note also 
the title of Felix, "governor" or procurator (24 1), 
Agrippa the king (25 13), Julius the centurion and 
the Augustan band (27 1). Ch 27 is a marvel of 
interest and accuracy for all who wish to know 

details of ancient seafaring. The matter has been 
worked over in a masterful way by James Smith, 
Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul. The title 
"First Man of the Island" (28 7) is now found on a 
coin of Melita. These are by no means all the 
matters of interest, but they will suffice. In most 
of the items given above Luke's veracity was once 
challenged, but now he has been triumphantly 
vindicated. The force of this vindication is best 
appreciated when one recalls the incidental nature 
of the items mentioned. They come from widely 
scattered districts and are just the points where in 
strange regions it is so easy to make slips. If 
space allowed, the matter could be set forth in more 
detail and with more justice to Luke's worth as a his- 
torian. It is true that in the earlier portions of the 
Acts we are not able to find so many geographical 
and historical corroborations. But the nature of 
the material did not call for the mention of so many 
places and persons. In the latter part Luke does 
not hesitate to record miraculous events also. 
His character as a historian is firmly estabfished 
by the passages where outside contact has been 
found. We cannot refuse him a good name in the 
rest of the book, though the value of the sources used 
certainly cuts a figure. It has been urged that Luke 
breaks down as a historian in the double mention 
of Quirinius in Lk 2 2 and Acts 5 37. But Ramsay 
(Was Christ Born at Bethlehem f) has shown how 
the new knowledge of the census system of Augustus 
derived from the Egyp papyri is about to clear 
up this difficulty. Luke's general accuracy at 
least calls for suspense of judgment, and in the 
matter of Theudas and Judas the Galilean (Acts 5) 
Luke as compared with Josephus outclasses his rival. 
Harnack (The Acts of the Apostles, 203-29) gives in 
his usual painstaking way a number of examples 
of "inaccuracy and discrepancy." But the great 
bulk of them are merely examples of independence 
in narration (cf Acts 9 with 22 and 26, where we 
have three reports of Paul's conversion). Harnack 
did not, indeed, once place as high a value on Luke 
as a historian as he now does. It is all the more 
significant, therefore, to read the following in 
Harnack's The Acts of the Apostles (298 f): "The 
book has now been restored to the position of credit 
which is its rightful due. It is not only, taken as a 
whole, a genuinely historical work, but even in the 
majority of its details it is trustworthy. • ■ .• • 
Judged from almost every possible standpoint 
of historical criticism it is a solid, respectable, and 
in many respects an extraordinary work." That 
is, in my opinion, an understatement of the facts 
(see Ramsay), but it is a remarkable conclusion 
concerning the trustworthiness of Luke when one 
considers the distance that Harnack has come. _ At 
any rate the prejudice against Luke is rapidly 
disappearing. The judgment of the future is 
forecast by Ramsay, who ranks Luke as a historian 
of the first order. 

XII. Purpose of the Book. — A ^eat deal of dis- 
cussion has been given to Luke's aim in the Acts. 
Baur's theory was that this book was written to 
give a conciliatory view of the conflict between Peter 
and Paul, and that a minute parallehsm exists in 
the Acts between these two heroes. This tendency 
theory once held the critical field, but it does not 
take into view all the facts, and fails to explain the 
book as a whole. Peter and Paul are the heroes of 
the book as they undoubtedly were the two chief 
personalities in apostoUc history (cf Wendt, Apostel- 
geschichte, 17). There is some parallehsm between 
the careers of the two men (cf the worship offered 
Peter at Caesarea in Acts 10 25, and that to Paul 
in 14 11; see also the punishment of Ananias and 
Sapphira and that of Elymas) . But Knowling (Acts, 
16) well repUes that curiously no use is made of the 




death of both Peter and Paul in Rome, possibly 
at the same time. If the Acts was written late, this 
matter would be open to the knowledge of the writer. 
There is in truth no real effort on Luke's part to 
paint_ Paul hke Peter or Peter like Paul. The 
few similarities in incident are merely natural his- 
torical parallels. Others have seen in the Acts 
a strong purpose to conciliate gentile (pagan) 
opinion in the fact that the Rom governors and 
mihtary officers are so uniformly presented as 
favorable to Paul, while the Jews are represented 
as the real aggressors against Christianity (cf 
Josephus' attitude toward Rome). Here again the 
fact is beyond dispute. <But the other explanation 
is the more natural, viz. that Luke brings out this 
aspect of the matter because it was the truth. Cf 
B. Weiss, Einl, 569. Luke does have an eye on the 
world relations of Christianity and rightly reflects 
Paul's ambition to win the Roman Empire to Christ 
(see Rom 15), but that is not to say that he has given 
the book a political bias or colored it so as to de- 
prive it of its historical worth. It is probably true 
(cf Knowling, Acts, 15; J. Weiss, Ueber die Absicht 
und den Uterarischen Charakter der Apostelgeschichte) 
that Luke felt, as did Paul, that Judaism realized 
its world destiny in Christianity, that Christianity 
was the true Judaism, the spiritual and real Israel. 
If Luke wrote Acts in Rome, while Paul's case was 
stiU before Nero, it is easy to understand the some- 
what long and minute account of the arrest and 
trials of Paul in Jerusalem, Caesarea and Rome. 
The point would be that the legal aspect of Chris- 
tianity before Rom laws was involved. Hitherto 
Christianity had found shelter as a sect of Judaism, 
and so was passed by Gallio in Corinth as a religio 
licita. If Paul was condemned as a Christian, the 
whole aspect of the matter would be altered. Chris- 
tianity would at once become religio illicita. The 
last word in the Acts comments on the fact that 
Paul, though still a prisoner, was permitted to 
preach unhindered. The importance of this point 
is clearly seen as one pushes on to the Neronian 
persecution in 64. After that date Christianity 
stood apart from Judaism in the eye of Rome. I 
have aheady stated my belief that Luke closed the 
Acts when he did and as he did because the events 
with Paul had only gone thus far. Numerous 
scholars hold that Luke had in mind a third book 
(Acts 1 1), a possible though by no means necessary 
inference from "first treatise." It was a climax 
to carry the narrative on to Rome with Paul, but it 
is rather straining the point to find all this in Acts 
1 8. Rome was not "the nethermost part of the 
earth," Spain more nearly being that. Nor did 
Paul take the gospel to Rome. Besides, to make 
the arrival of Paul in Rome the goal in the mind of 
Christ is too narrowing a purpose. The purpose 
to go to Rome did dominate Paul's mind for several 
years (19 21), but Paul cuts no figure in the early 
part of the book. And Paul wished to push on from 
Rome to Spain (Rom 15 24). It is probably true 
that Luke means to announce his purpose in Acts 
1 1-8. One needs to keep in mind also Lk 1 1-4. 
There are various ways of writing history. Luke 
chooses the biographical method in Acts. Thus 
he conceives that he can best set forth the tre- 
mendous task of interpreting the first thirty years 
of the apostohc history. It is around persons (cf 
Harnack, The Acts of the Apostles, 117), two great 
figures (Peter and Paul), that the narrative is focused. 
Peter is most prominent in 1-12, Paul in 13-28. 
Still Paul's conversion is told in Acts 9 and Peter 
reappears in 15. But these great personages do 
not stand alone. John the Apostle is certainly 
with Peter in the opening chapters. The other 
apostles are mentioned also by name (1 13) and a 
number of times in the first twelve chapters (and 

in 15). But after 15 they drop out of the narra- 
tive, for Luke follows the fortunes of Paul. The 
other chief secondary figures in Acts are Stephen, 
Phihp, Barnabas, James, ApoUos, all Hellenists save 
James (Harnack, 120). The minor characters are 
numerous (John, Mark, Silas, Timothy, Aquila and 
Priscilla, Aristarchus, etc). In most cases Luke 
gives a distinct pictiure of these incidental person- 
ages. In particular he brings out sharply such 
men as GaUio, Claudius, Lysias, Felix, Festus, 
Herod, Agrippa I and II, Julius. Luke's concep- 
tion of the apostohc history is that it is the work of 
Jesus still carried on by the Holy Spirit (1 If). 
Christ chose the apostles, commanded them to 
wait for power from on high, filled them with the 
Holy Spirit and then sent them on the mission 
of world conquest. In the Acts Luke records the 
waiting, the coming of the Holy Spirit, the planting 
of a powerful church in Jerus and the expansion 
of the gospel to Samaria and all over the Roman 
Empire. He addresses the book to Theophilus 
as his patron, a Gentile Christian plainly, as he had 
done with his gospel. The book is designed for the 
enhghtenment of Christians generally concerning 
the historic origins of Christianity. It is in truth 
the first church history. It is in reality the Acts 
of the Holy Spirit as wrought through these men. 
It is an inspiring narration. Luke had no doubt 
whatever of the future of a gospel with such a 
history and with such heroes of faith as Peter and 

XIII. Analysis. — •< 

1. The connection between the work of the apostles 
and that of Jesus (1 1-11). 

2. The equipment of the early disciples for their 
task (1 12—2 47). 

(a) The disciples obeying Christ's parting com- 
mand (1 12-14). 
(6) The place of Judas filled (1 15-26). 

(c) Miraculous manifestations of the presence of 
the Holy Sphit (2 1-13). 

(d) Peter's interpretation of the situation (2 

(e) The immediate effect of the sermon (2 

(/) The new spirit in the Christian community 
(2 42-47). 

3. The development of the work in Jerusalem 
(3 1—8 la). 

(a) An incident in the work of Peter and John 

with Peter's apologetic (3). 
(6) Opposition of the Sadducees aroused by the 

preaching of the resurrection of Jesus (4 


(c) An internal difficulty, the problem of pov- 
erty (4 32—5 11). 

(d) Great progress of the cause in the city (5 

(e) Renewed hostility of the Sadducees and 
Gamaliel's retort to the Pharisees (5 17- 

(J) A crisis in church life and the choice of the 
seven Hellenists (6 1-7). 

(g) Stephen's spiritual interpretation of Chris- 
tianity stirs the antagonism of the Pharisees 
and leads to his violent death (6 8 — 8 la). 

4. The compulsory extension of the gospel to Judaea, 
Samaria and the neighboring regions (8 16-40). 
(a) The great persecution, with Saul as leader 

(8 16^). 
(6) Philip's work as a notable example of the 
work of the scattered disciples (8 5-40). 

5. The conversion of Saul changes the whole situa,- 
tion for Christianity (9 1-31). 

(a) Saul's mission to Damascus (9 1-3). 
(6) Saul stopped in his hostile course and turns 
Christian himself (9 4-18). 




(c) Saul becomes a powerful exponent of the 
gospel in Damascus and Jerusalem (9 19-30). 

(d) The church has peace (9 31). 

6. The door opened to the Gentiles, both Roman 
and Greek (9 32—11 30). 

(a) Peter's activity in this time of peace (9 32- 

(b) The appeal from Cornelius in Caesarea and 
Peter's response (10). 

(c) Peter's arraignment before the Pharisaic 
element in the church in Jerusalem (11 

(d) Greeks in Antioch are converted and Barna- 
bas brings Saul to this work (11 19-26). 

(e) The Greek Christians send relief to the 
Jewish Christians in Jerusalem (11 27-30). 

7. Persecution from the civil government (12). 

(a) Herod Agrippa I kills James and imprisons 

Peter (12 1-19). 
(6) Herod pays the penalty for his crimes (12 

(c) Christianity prospers (12 24 f). 

8. The gentile propaganda from Antioch under the 
leadership of Barnabas and Saul (13, 14). 

(o) The specific call of the Holy Spirit to this 

work (13 1-3). 
(6) The province of Cyprus and the leadership 

of Paul (13 4-12). 

(c) The province of Pamphylia and the desertion 
of John Mark (13 13). 

(d) The province of Galatia (Pisidia and Lyca- 
onia) and the stronghold of the gospel upon 
the native population (13 14 — 14 24) . 

(e) The return and report to Antioch (14 25- 

9. The gentile campaign challenged by the Juda- 
izers (15 1-35). 

(o) They meet Paul and Barnabas at Antioch 

who decide to appeal to Jerusalem (15 1-3). 

(6) The first public meeting in Jerusalem (15 4 f ) . 

(c) The second and more extended discussion 
with the decision of the conference (15 6-29). 

(d) The joyful reception (in Antioch) of the 
victory of Paul and Barnabas (15 30^35). 

10. The second great campaign extending to 
Europe (15 36—18 22). 

(o) The breach between Paul and Barnabas 
over John Mark (15 36-39). 

(6) From Antioch to Troas with the Mace- 
donian Cry (15 40—16 10). 

(c) In Phihppi in Macedonia the gospel gains 
a foothold in Europe, but meets opposition 
(16 11-40). . 

(d) Paul is driven also from Thessalonica and 
Berea (cf Philippi), cities of Macedonia 
also (17 1-15). 

(e) Paul's experience in Athens (17 16-34). 

(/) In Corinth Paul spends nearly two years 
and the cause of Christ wins legal recog- 
nition from the Roman governor (18 1-17). 

(g) The return to Antioch by way of Ephesus, 
Caesarea and probably Jerusalem (18 

11. The third great tour, with Ephesus as head- 
quarters (18 23—20 3). 

(a) Paul in Galatia and Phrygia agam (18 

(&) Apollos in Ephesus before Paul comes 

(18 24-28). 

(c) Paul's three years in Ephesus (19 1 — 20 

(d) The brief visit to Corinth because of the 
troubles there (20 16-3). 

12. Paul turns to Jerusalem again with plans for 
Rome (20 4—21 16). 

(a) His companions (20 4). 

(6) Rejoined by Luke at Philippi (20 5 f). 

(c) The story of Troas (20 7-12). 

(d) Coasting along Asia (20 13-16). 

(e) With the Ephesian elders at Miletus (20 

(/) From Miletus to Tyre (21 1-6). 
(?) From Tyre to Caesarea (21 7-14). 
(h) From Caesarea to Jerusalem (21 15 f). 

13. The outcome in Jerusalem (21 15—23 30). 

(a) Paul's reception by the brethren (21 15-17). 

(6) Their proposal of a plan by which Paul 
could undo the work of the Judaizers con- 
cerning him in Jerusalem (21 18-26). 

(c) The uproar in the temple courts raised by 
the Jews fl-om Asia as Paul was carrying 
out the plan to disarm the Judaizers (21 

(d) Paul's rescue by the Roman captain and 
Paul's defence to the Jewish mob (21 31 — 

22 23). 

(e) Examination of the chief captain (22 24- 

(/) Brought before the Sanhedrin (22 30 — 

23 10). 

ig) Cheered by the Lord Jesus (23 11). . 
{h) Paul's escape from the plot of Jewish con- 
spirators (23 12-30). 

14. Paul a prisoner in Caesarea (23 31 — 26). 

(a) The fhght to Caesarea and presentation to 

Felix (23 31-35). 
(6) Paul's appearance before Felix (24). 

(c) Paul before Festus (25 1-12). 

(d) Paul, as a matter of curiosity and courtesy, 
brought before Herod Agrippa II (25 13 — 
26 32). 

15. Paul going to Rome (27 1—28 15). 
(a) From Caesarea to Myra (27 1-5). 
(6) From Myra to Fan- Havens (27 6-8). 

(c) From Fair Havens to Malta (27 9—28 10). 

(d) From Malta to Rome (28 11-15). 

16. Paul in Rome at last (28 16^31). 
(ffl) His quarters (28 16). 

(6) His first interview with the Jews (28 17-22). 

(c) His second interview with the Jews (28 

(d) Two years afterward still a prisoner, but 
with freedom to preach the gospel (28 30 f). 

Literature. — Besides the works referred to above 
see Wendt's edition of Meyer's Kommentar (1899) ; 
Headlam in HDB; Knowling on Acts in Expositor's 
Greelf Testament (1900); Knowling, Witness of the 
Epistles (1892), Testimony of St. Paul to Christ (1905); 
Moflatt, Historical NT (1901). 

Here is a selected list of important worlds: 

1. Introduction: Bacon, Intro to the NT (1900); 
Bennett and Adeney. Biblical Intro (1899) ; Bleek, Einl 
in das NT (4 Aufl, 1900) ; S. Davidson, (3d ed, 1894) ; 
C. R. Gregory, Canon and Text of the NT (1907); H. J. 
Holtzmann, Einl in das NT (3 Aufl, 1892); Jacquies. 
Hiatoire des livres du NT (1905-8) ; JiUiclier, Intro to the 
NT (tr, 1904); Peake, Critical Intro to the NT (1909); 
Reuss, Canon of the Holy Scriptures (tr, 1886) ; Salmon, 
Hist Intro to the Study of the Books of the NT (7th ed, 
1896) ; von Soden, The History of Early Christian Lit. (tr, 
1906); B. Weiss, A Manual of Intro to the NT (tr, 18891; 
Westcott, History of the Canon of the NT (1869); Zahn, 
Intro to the NT (tr, 1909); Mofifatt, Intro to the Lit. of 
(Ae 2Vr (1911). , ... 

2. Text: See general works on textual criticism oi the 
NT (Gregory, Kenyon, Nestle, Tischendorf, Scrivener, 
von Soden, B. Weiss, Westcott, etc). Of special trea^ 
tises note Blass, Philology of the Gospels (1898). Acta 
Apostolorum (1895); Bomemann, Acta Apostolorum 
(1848) ; Chase, Old Syriac Element in the Text of Codex 
Bezae (1893); Corssen, Der cyprianische Text der Acta 
Apostolorum (1892); Klostermann, Probleme im Apostel 
Texte (1883); Klostermann, Vindiciae Lucanae (1866); 
Nestle, Philologia (1896); J. Rendel Harris, Study of 
Codex Bezae (1891). , ,., 

3. Apostolic History: For literature on the hfe of 
Paul see Robertson, Epochs in the Life of Paul (1909), 
321-27, and art. Paul in this encyclopaedia. Important 
general works are the following: Bartlet, The Apostolic 
Age (1899); Baumgarten, The Apostolic History (tr, 
1854); Blunt, Studies in the Apostolic Age (1909); 
Burton, Records and Letters of the Apostolic Age (1895); 
DoeUinger, The First Age of the Church (tr, 1867); 
Dobschlitz, Christian Life in the Primitive Church (tr, 

Adam in OT 



1904); Ewald, History of the Apostolic Times (tr, Vol VI 
in History of Israel) ; Farrar, Early Days of Christianity 
(1887); Fisher, The Beginnings of Christianity (1877); 
Gilbert, Christianity in the Apostolic Age (1908); Har- 
uack. The Expansion of Christianity in the First Three 
Centuries (tr, 1904^5); Hausrath, Neut. Zeitgeschichte 
(Bd. 2, 1872); Heinrici, Das Urchristentum (1902); 
Holtzmann, Neut. Zeitgeschichte (1895); Hort, Judaistic 
Christianity (1898) ; Organization of the Early Christian 
Churches (1895); Lechler, The Apostolic and Post- 
Apostolic Times (tr, 1886); Lightfoot, Dissertations on 
the Apostolic Age (1892); Lindsay, The Church and the 
Ministry in the Early Centuries (1902); McGiflert, A 
History of Christianity in the Apostolic Age (1897) ; 
Neander, History of the Planting and Training of the 
Christian Church (1889); Pfleiderer, Christian Origins 
(1906) ; Pressense, The Early Years of Christianity (1870) ; 
Purves, Christianity in the Apostolic Age (1901); Ramsay, 
The Church in the Roman Empire (1893) ; Ritschl, Die 
Entstehung der altkath. Kirche (1857); Ropes, The Apos- 
tolic Age in the Light of Modern Criticism (1906) ; Weiz- 
sacker. The Apostolic Age of the Christian Church (tr, 1894- 
95); Pictures of the Apostolic Church (1910). 

4. Special Treatises on The Acts: Belser, Beitrdge zur 
Erkldrung der Apostelgeschichte (1897) ; Benson, Ad- 
dresses on the Acts of the Apostles (1901); Bethge, Die 
paulinischen Reden der Apostelgeschichte (1887); Blass, 
Acta Apostolorum secundum Formam quae videtur Roma- 
nam (1896); Chase, The Credibility of the Book of the 
Acts of the Apostles (1902); Clemen, Die Apostelge- 
schichte, im Lichte der neueren Forschungen (1905) ; Fiene, 
Eine vorkanonische Nebenlieferung des Lukas in Evan- 
gelium und Apostelgeschichte (1891); Hamack, Luke, 
the Physician (tr, 1907); The Acts of the Apostles (1909); 
Hilgenield, Acta Apostolorum Graece et Latine (1899); 
Jtingst, Die Quellen der Apostelgeschichte (1895) ; Krenkel, 
Josephus und Lucas (1894); Luckok, Footprints of the 
Apostles as Traced by St. Luke in the Acts (1897) ; J. 
Lightfoot, Hebrew and Talmudical Exercitations on the 
Acts of the Apostles (1768); Paley, Horae Paulinae (Birks 
ed, 1850); Ramsay, St. Paul the Traveller (1896); Pau- 
line and Other Studies (1906); Cities of St. Paul (1908), 
Luke the Physician, and Other Studies (1908) ; J. Smith, 
Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul (4th ed, 1880) ; Sorof , 
Die Entstehung der Apostelgeschichte (1890); Spitta, Die 
Apostelgeschichte, ihre Quellen und deren geschichtlicher 
Werth (1891) ; Stifler, An Intro to the Book of Ads (1892) ; 
Vogel, Zur Characteristik des Lukas nach Sprache und 
Stil (1897) ; J. Weiss, Ueber die Absicht und die litera- 
rischen Charakter der Apostelgeschichte (1897) ; Zeller, 
The Contents and Origin of the Acts of the Apostles (tr, 
1875); Maurice Jones, St. Paul the Orator (1910). 

5. Commentaries;' There are the great standard works, 
like Bede, Bengel, Calvin, Chrysostom, Grotius. The 
chief modern commentaries are the following; Alex- 
ander (1857), AUord (6th ed, 1868), Bartlet (1901), 
Bla^ {Acta Apostolorum, 1895), Ewald (Apostelgeschichte, 
1871), Pelten (Apostelgeschichte, 1892), Hackett (1882), 
Holtzmaim (Hand-Commentar, 3 Aufl, 1901), Kna- 
benbauer (Actus Apostol, 1899), KuowUng (Exposi- 
tor's Gr Text, 1900), Luthardt und Zoeckler (Apostel- 
geschichte, 2d ed, 1894), McGarvey (1892), Meyer (tr by 
Gloag and Dickson, 1885), Meyer- Wendt (Apostel- 
geschichte, 1888). Noesgen (Apostelgeschichte, 1882), Ols- 
hausen (1832), Page (1897), Rackham (1901), RendaU, 
(1897), Stokes (1892), B. Weiss (Apostelgeschichte, 1892, 
2d ed). 

A. T. Robertson 
ACTS OF PILATE, pi'lat, pi'lSt. See Apocry- 
phal Gospels. 

ACTS OF SOLOMON: "The book of the acts 
of Solomon" (1 K 11 41), probably a history 
based on the state documents kept by the official 
recorder. See 14 19.29; 15 23.31; 16; 
22 39.45, etc. 

ACUA, ak'u-a. See Acud. 

ACUB, a'kub (B, 'A.Koi^, Ako4ph; A, 'Ako«|i, 
Akoum) = Bakhuk (Ezr 2 51; Neh 7 53): The 
descendants of A. (temple-servants) returned with 
Zerubbabel to Jerus (1 Esd 5 31). 

ACUD, a'kud ('Akov8, Akoud; AV Acua) = 
Akkub (Ezr 2 45) which see; omitted in Neh 7: 
The descendants of A. (temple-servants) returned 
with Zerubbabel to Jerus (1 Esd 5 30). 

ADADAH, a-da'da (n^y"!?, 'adVadhah): A 
city in the southern part of Judah (Josh 15 22). 
The older copies of the Gr text have Aroutl, but 
that is not a sufficient reason for identifying the 
name with the Aroer of 1 S 30 28. Some scholars 

adopt the change of text, and identify the site with 
Ararah, about seven miles S.E. of Beer-sheba. 
Others identify it with Adadah, eight or nine miles 
S.E. of Arad. 

ADADRIMMON, a-dad-rim'on: Shorter and 
less accurate name of a place in the Valley of 
Megiddo, which tradition connected with the death 
of King Josiah (Zee 12 11; 2 Ch 35 22). See 

ADAH, a'da (^"7? , ^ddhah, "adornment") : 

(1) One of the two wives of Lamech the descendant 
of Cain (Gen 4 19.20.23). The narrative in Gen 
assigns to her two sons, Jabal the "father" of tent- 
dweUing people, and Jubal the "father of all such 
as handle the harp and pipe." Jos says that 
Lamech had 77 sons by Ada and Zillah (_Ant, I, 
ii, 2). 

(2) According to Gen 36, the Hittite 
wife of Esau, daughter of Elon, and mother of 
Eliphaz. In this chapter Esau's other wives are 
Oholibamah, a Hivite, and Basemath the daughter 
of Ishmael. The names are differently given else- 
where (Gen 26 34; 28 9). Basemath is said to 
be the daughter of Elon. The daughter of Ishmael 
is called Mahalath. In place of Oholibamah the 
Hivite we find Judith the daughter of Beeri the 
Hittite. Data are lacking for the solution of the 
problem. Willis J. Beecher 

ADAIAH, a-da'ya, a-dl'a (H^ny , 'ddhayah, "Jeho- 
vah hath adorned") : 

(1) Apparently the seventh of the nine sons of 
Shimei, who is apparently the same with Shema, 
who is the fifth of the sons of Elpaal, who is the 
second of the two sons of Shaharaim and Hushim 
(1 Ch 8 21). Shaharaim and his descendants are 
listed with the descendants of Benjamin, though 
his relations to Benjamin are not stated. 

(2) A Levite; ancestor to David's singer Asaph, 
and a descendant of the fifth generation from 
Gershom (1 Ch 6 41). 

(3) The father of Maaseiah, who was one of the 
captains of hundreds associated with Jehoiada the 
priest in making Joash king (2 Ch 23 1). 

(4) A resident of Bozkath, and father of Jedidah 
the mother of King Josiah (2 K 22 1). 

(5) A descendant of Judah through Perez. His 
great-great-grandson Maaseiah resided in Jerus after 
Nehemiah had rehabilitated the city (Neh 11 5). 

(6) One of the men of Israel, not a priest or Levite, 
but "of the sons of Bani," who promised Ezra 
that he would part with his foreign wife (Ezr 10 

(7) The same man or another, in a different group 
of the sons of Bani (Ezr 10 39). 

(8) One of the priests of the latest Bible times, 
mentioned with a partial genealogy (Neh 11 12; 
1 Ch 9 12). Willis J. Beecher 

ADALIA, a/-da-li'a (S^b~Sl, 'ddhalya', probably 
a Pers name, meaning unknown): One of the ten 
sons of Haman who were put to death by the Jews 

(Est 9 8). 

ADAM, ad'am, IN OT AND APOC (DnS, 
'adham; LXX 'ASap., Addm): The Heb word 

occurs some 560 times in the OT with 
1. Usage the meaning "man," "mankind." Out- 
and Ety- side Gen 1-5 the only case where it is 
mology unquestionably a proper name is 1 Ch 

1 1. Ambiguous are Dt 32 8, AV 
"sons of Adam." RV "children of men"; Job 31 
33 AV "as" RV "like Adam," but margin "after 
the manner of men"; Hos 6 7 AV "like men," 
RV "like Adam," and vice versa in the margin. In 



Adam In OT 

Gen 1 the word occurs only twice, vs 26.27. In Gen 
2-4 it is found 26 times, and in 5 In the 
last four cases and in 4 25 it is obviously in- 
tended as a proper name; but the VSS show con- 
siderable uncertainty as to the rendering in the 
other cases. Most modern interpreters would 
restore a vowel point to the Heb text in 2 20; 3 
17.21, thus introducing the definite article, and 
read uniformly "the man" up to 4 25, where the 
absence of the art. may be taken as an indication 
that "the man" of the previous narrative is to be 
identified with "Adam," the head of the genealogy 
found in 5 1 ff. Several conjectures have been put 
forth as to the root-meaning of the Heb word: (1) 
creature; (2) ruddy one; (3) earthborn. Less prob- 
able are (4) pleasant — to sight — and (5) social, 

Many argue from the context that the language of 

Gen 1 26.27 is general, that it is the creation of the 

human species, not of any particular 

2. Adam individual or individuals, that is 
in the described. But (1) the context does 
Narrative not even descend to a species, but 
of Genesis arranges created things according to 

the most general possible classification : 
light and darkness; firmament and waters; land 
and seas; plants; sun, moon, stars; swimrning 
and flsdng creatures; land animals. No possible 
parallel to this classification remains in the case of 
mankind. (2) In the narrative of Gen 1 the recur- 
rence of identical expressions is almost rigidly uni- 
form, but in the case of man the tmique statement 
occurs (ver 27), "Male and female created he them." 
Although Dillmann is here in the minority among 
interpreters, it would be difficult to show that he 
is wrong in interpreting this as referring to one 
male and one female, the first pair. In this case 
we have a point of contact and of agreement with 
the narrative of ch 2. Man, created in God's image, 
is given dominion over every animal, is allowed 
every herb and fruit tree for his sustenance, and is 
bidden multiply and fill the earth. In Gen 2 4— 
6 5 the first man is made of the dust, becomes a 
living creature by the breath of God, is placed in 
the garden of Eden to till it, gives names to the 
animals, receives as his counterpart and helper a 
woman formed from part of his own body, and at 
the woman's behest eats of the forbidden fruit of 
"the tree of the knowledge of good and evil." With 
her he is then driven from the garden, under the 
curse of brief life and heavy labor, since should he 
eat— or continue to eat?— of the fruit of the "tree 
of life," not previously forbidden, he might go on 
living forever. He becomes the father of Cain 
and of Abel, and of Seth at a time after the murder 
of Abel. According to 5 3.5 Adam is aged 130 
years at the birth of Seth and lives to the age of 
930 years. , , ^ , ^ . • 

That man was meant by the Creator to be m a 
pecuUar sense His own "image"; that he is the 

divinely appointed ruler over all his 

3. Teach- fellow-creatures on earth; and that 
ings of the he enjoys, together with them, God's 
Narrative blessing upon a creature fit to serve the 

ends for which it was created — these 
things he upon the surface of 1 26-31. In hke 
manner 2-4 tell us that the gift of a blessed immor- 
tality was within man's reach; that his Creator 
ordained that his moral development should come 
through an inward trial, not as a mere gift; and 
that the presence of suffering in the world is due 
to sin, the presence of sin to the machinations of a 
subtle tempter. The development of the doctrine 
of the fall belongs to the NT (see Adam in NT; 

Fall, The). . , .. x- j iu 

Allusions to the narrative of the creation and the 
fall of man, covering most points of the narrative 

of Gen 1-4, are found in 2 Esd 3 4- 
4 30; 6 54-56; 7 11.46-48; Tob 8 6; Wisd 2 23 f 

9 2 f ; 10 1 f; Ecclus 15 14; 17 1-4 
4. Adam in 25 24; 40 1; 49 16. In both 2 Esd 
Apocrypha and Wisd we read that death came upon 

all men through Adam's sin, while 2 Esd 
4 30 declares that "a grain of evil seed was sown 
in the heart of Adam from the beginning." Aside 
from this doctrinal development the Apoc offers no 
additions to the OT narrative. F. K. Fabb 

ADAM IN OT (Evolutionary! Interpretation): 
DnSI, 'adhdm, "man," Gen 1 26, or "a man," Gen 
2 5; Q' , ha-'adhdm, "the man"; mostly with the 
article as a generic term, and not used as the proper 
name of a patriarch until 5 3, after which the name 
first given to both man and woman [6 2] is used of 
the man alone) : The being in whom is embodied the 
Scripture idea of the first created man and ancestor 
of mankind. The account, which belongs mostly 
to the oldest stratum of the Genesis story (J) 
merits careful attention, because evolutionary 
science, history, and new theology have all quarreled 
with or rejected it on various grounds, without 
providing the smallest approach to a satisfactory 

/. What the Writer Meant to Describe.— It is 

important first of all, if we can, to get at what the 

author meant to describe, and how it 

1. Deriva- is related, if at all, to literal and 
tion and factual statement. 

Use of the (1) Scholars have exercised them- 
Name selves much, but with little arrival at 

certainty, over the derivation of the 
name; a matter which, as it is concerned with one 
of the commonest words of the language, is of no 
great moment as compared with the writer's own 
understanding of it. The most plausible conjec- 
ture, perhaps, is that which connects it with the 
Assyr adamu, "to make," or "produce," hence, 
"the produced one," "the creature." The author 
of Gen 2 7 seems to associate it, rather by word- 
play than derivation, with hs.- ddhamah, "the 
ground" or "soil," as the source from which man's 
body was taken (cf 3 19.23). The name 'ddharnah 
itself seems to be closely connected with the name 
Edom (O'nS:, 'edhSm, Gen 25 30), meaning "red"; 
but whether from the redness of the soil, or the 
ruddiness of the man, or merely the incident 
recorded in Gen 26 30, is uncertain. Without 
doubt the writer of Gen 2, 3 had in mind man's 
earthly origin, and understood the name accordingly. 
(2) The account of the creation is twice given, 
and from two very different points of view. In the 

first account. Gen 1 26-31, man is 

2. Outline represented as created on the sixth 
of the day along with the animals; a species 
Genesis in the animal world; but differing 
Narrative from them in bearing the image and 

likeness of God, in having dominion 
over all created things, and in having grains and 
fruits for food, while they have herbs. The writer's 
object in all this seems to be as much to identify 
man with the animal creation as to differentiate 
him from it. In the second account, 2 4 — 3 24, 
man's identity with the animal is ignored or at 
least minimized (cf 2 20), while the object is to 
determine his status in a spiritual individualized 
realm wherein he has the companionship of God. 
Jeh God "forms" or "shapes" him out of the dust 
of the ground, breathes into his nostrils the breath 

» It ought to be superfluous to say that the unfolding or 
development of the human personality here identified 
with evolution is something far higher, deeper, and other 
than anything that can be fathered upon Darwin or 
Herbert Spencer. Evolution (unfolding) is the great 
processor movement; natural selection and survival oi 
the fittest name only guesses at some of its methods. 



of life, and with such special distinction he becomes, 
Uke other created things, a "Uving soul" (nephesh 
hayyah; cf 2 7 with 1 30). He is placed in a 
garden situated somewhere among the rivers of 
Babylonia, his primitive occupation being to dress 
and keep it. In the midst of the garden are two 
mysterious trees, the tree of life, whose fruit seems 
to have the potency of conferring immortality 
(cf 3 22), and the tree of the knowledge of good and 
evil, whose fruit is not to be eaten under penalty 
of death. Meanwhile, as in naming the animals 
the man finds no real companion, Jeh God "builds" 
one of the man's ribs into a woman, and the man 
recognizes her spiritual unity with him, naming her 
accordingly. The story goes on to relate, without 
note of time, how the serpent, the subtlest of beasts, 
urged on the woman the desirable qualities of the 
fruit of the forbidden tree, intimating that God had 
made the prohibition from envy, and roundly 
denying that death would be the consequence of 
eating. Accordingly the woman took and ate, and 
gave to her husband, who also ate; and the immedi- 
ate consequence was a sense of shame, which caused 
them to cover their nakedness with girdles of fig 
leaves, and a sense of guilt (not differentiated by 
Adam from shame, 3 10), which made the pair 
reluctant to meet Jeh God. He obtains the con- 
fession of their disobedience, however; and passes 
prophetic sentence: on the serpent, of perpetual 
antipathy between its species and the human; 
on the woman, of sorrows and pains and subservi- 
ence to the man; and on the man, of hardship and 
severe labors, until he returns to the dust from which 
he was taken. As the pair have chosen to eat of 
the tree of knowledge, lest now they should eat 
of the tree of life they are expelled from the garden, 
and the gate is guarded by flaming sword and 

(3) It is impossible to read this story with the 
entire detachment that we accord to an ancient 
myth, or even to a time- and space- 
3. History conditioned historical tale. It Con- 
or Exposi- tinually suggests intimate relations 
tion? with the permanent truths of human 

nature, as if there were a fiber in it 
truer than fact. And this provokes the inquiry 
whether the author himself intended the account 
of the Edenic state and the Fall to be taken as 
literal history or as exposition. He uniformly 
makes the name generic by the article {the adam or 
man), the only exceptions, which are not real 
exceptions in meaning, being 1 26 and 2 5, already 
noted. It is not until 6 3, where the proper name 
Adam is as it were officially given, that such his- 
tory as is conditioned by chronology and genealogy 
begins. What comes before this, except the some- 
what vague location of the Eden region, 2 10-14, 
reads rather like a description of the primordial 
manhood nature, not in philosophical but in nar- 
rative language. It is not fable; it is not a worked- 
over myth; it is not a didactic parable; it is (to 
speak technically) exposition by narration. By a 
descriptive story it traces the elemental movement of 
manhood in its first spiritual impact on this earthly 
life. In other words, instead of being concerned 
to relate a factual series of events from the remote 
past, the writer's penetrative intuition goes down- 
ward and inward to those spiritual movements of 
being which are germinal in all manhood. It is 
a spiritual analysis of man's intrinsic nature, and as 
such must be spiritually discerned. An analogous 
manner of exposition may be seen in the account of 
Our Lord's temptation in the wilderness, Mt 4 1-11, 
which account, if authentic, must have come ulti- 
mately from Our Lord Himself. 

//. How the Story Looks Today. — Scarcely any 
other Scripture story has so suiTered from the 

changes wrought by modem thinking as has this 
story of Adam. On the one hand it is felt that to 
refer the fall and inherited guilt of mankind to this 
experience of Adam as a cause is to impose too great 
a burden, dogmatic and historic, on this primitive 
story. Yet on the other hand the story, including 
this imphcation of the primal fall, refuses to be 
dismissed as an outworn or fantastic myth. It 
lays hold so vitally on the roots of human nature 
that our only course is not to reject it but to re-read 
it with the best Ught our age affords. And whether 
best or not, the evolutionary fight in which all 
modern thought is colored cannot be ignored. 

(1) The divergent assumptions of the traditional 
and the evolutionary view may be roughly stated 

thus: of the traditional, that in con- 

1. In the sequencei of this Eden lapse man is 
Light of a ruined nature, needing redemption 
Evolution and reinstatement, and that therefore 

the subsequent spiritual deahng with 
him must be essentially pathological and remedial; 
of the evolutionary, that by the very terms of his 
creation, which the lapse from obedience did not 
annul, man is spiritually a child needing growth and 
education, and that therefore the subsequent deal- 
ing with him must foster the development within 
him of a nature essentially normal and true. It 
is evident that these two views, thus stated, merely 
regard two lines of potency in one natiu-e. With- 
out rejecting the traditional, or stopping to inquire 
how it and the evolutionary may coexist, we may 
here consider how the story before us responds to 
the evolutionary view. Only — it must be premised 
— the evolution whose beginning it describes is 
not the evolution of the human species; we can 
leave natural science and history to take care of 
that; but, beginning where this leaves off, the 
evolution of the individual, from the first forth- 
putting of individual initiative and choice toward 
the far-off adult and complete personaUty. This, 
which in view of its culmination we may call the 
evolution of personality, is evolution distinctively 
spiritual, that stage and grade of upward moving 
being which succeeds to the material and psychical 
(cf 1 Cor 15 45.46). On the material stage of 
evolution, which the human species shares with 
the beast and the plant. Scripture is silent. Nor 
is it greatly concerned with the psychical, or cul- 
tural development of the human species, except 
to reveal in a divinely ordered history and litera- 
ture its essential inadequacy to the highest manhood 
potencies. Rather its field is the evolution of the 
spirit, in which alone the highest personal values 
are reaUzed. In the delimitation of this field it has 
a consistent origin, course and culmination of its 
own, as it traces the line of spiritual uprise and 
growth from the first Adam, who as a "living 
soul" was subject to the determinism of the species, 
to the last Adam, who as a "life-giving spirit" 
is identified with the supreme Personality in whom 
Divine and human met and blended. Of this 
tremendous evolution the story of Adam, with a 
clearness which the quaint narrative style of exposi- 
tion does not impair, reveals the primal and direct- 
ive factors. 

(2) Just as the habitat and the nature of created 
things answer to each other, so the environment in 

which man is placed when he comes 

2. The Gar- from his Creator's hand connotes the 
den Habitat kind of life he is fitted to five. He 

is placed not in wild and refractory 
Nature but in a garden watered and planted with a 
view-to his receiving care and nurture from above. 
Nature is kindly and responsive, furnishing fruits 
ready to his hand, and requiring only that he "dress 
and keep" the garden. Of all the trees he may 
freely eat, including the tree of life; save only the 



most centrally located of all, the tree of "knowl- 
edge of good and evil." The being fitted to this 
habitat is a man adult in stature and intelligence, 
but still hke a child; not yet individualized to deter- 
minate character, not yet exerting a will of his own 
apart from the will of his Creator; in other words, 
as spiritually considered, not yet detached from the 
spirit of his personal Source. All this reads like 
the description of a life essentially negative, or 
rather neutral, with free communication both 
downward and upward, but neither that of a domes- 
ticated animal nor of a captive god; a being bal- 
anced, as it were, between the earthly and the 
Divine, but not yet aware of the possession of that 
individual will and choice which alone can give 
spiritual significance to a committal to either. 

(3) In the first stbry of man's creation, 1 26-31, 
describing his creation as a species, the distinction 
of male and female is explicitly included 
3. The Or- (1 27). In the second story "(2, 3), 
ganic Factor wherein man is contemplated rather 
as an individual, the description of his 
natm-e begins before any distinction of sex exists. 
If the writer meant this latter to portray a condition 
of man in time or in natural fact, there is thus a 
discrepancy in accounts. If we regard it, however, 
aa giving a factor in spiritual evolution, it not 
only becomes full of meaning but lays hold pro- 
foundly on the ultimate teleology of creation. The 
naive story relates that the woman was "builded" 
out of the already shaped material of the man's 
body, in order to supply a fellowship which the 
animals could not; a help "answering to" him 
(k''neghdd; cf 2 18 margin). Then it makes the man 
recognize this conjugal relation, not at all with 
reference to sexual passion or the propagation of 
species but as furnishing man occasion, so to say, 
for loving and being loved, and making this capacity 
essential to the integrity of his nature. The 
value of this for the ultimate creative purpose 
and revelation is as marvelous as it is profound; 
it is the organic factor in reaUzing the far-reaching 
design of Him who is evolving a being bearing His 
image and deriving from Him the breath of life. 
That God is Spu-it (Jn 4 24), that God is love 
(1 Jn 4 8.16) and love "creation's final law," may as 
an idea- be later revelation; but meanwhile from the 
beginning, in the commonest relation of life, a 
pulsation of mutual love is implanted, by making 
man a dual nature, wherein love, which is the an- 
tithesis of self-seeking, has the equal and compan- 
ionable object necessary to its existence. Thus in 
the conjugal relation the potency of the highest 
and broadest spiritual value is made intrinsic. In 
all the dubious course of his subsequent evolution, 
this capacity of love, though itself subject to the 
corruptio optimi pessima, is like a redeeming 
element at the heart alike of the individual and of 
society. . . . 

(4) Even in this neutral garden existence it is 
noteworthy that the man's nature evinces its 
superiority to the animal in the 
4. The In- absence of determinism. He is not 
vasionof enslaved to an instinct of bUnd con- 
Subtlety formity to an external will. In other 
words, he can cooperate intelligently 
in his own spiritual evolution. He has the power of 
choice, ministered by the stimulus of an unmotived 
prohibition. He can abstain and live, or eat and 
die (2 16.17). No reasons are given, no tram of 
spiritual consequences, to one whose spirit is not 
yet awake; in this pre-spiritual stage rather the 
beginnings of law and prescription must be arbi- 
trary. Yet even in so rudimentary a relation we 
are aware of the essential contrast between animal 
and spiritual evolution, in that the latter is not a 
blind and instinctive imposition from without, but 

a free course submitted to man's intelhgenoe and 
cooperation. And it is a supremely significant fea^ 
ture of the narrative to make the first self-interested 
impulse come by the way of subtlety. "The 
serpent," the writer premises, "was more subtle 
than any beast of the field which Jeh God had 
made." It points to a trait which he puts on the 
border-line between the species and the individual, 
the disposition, not indeed to rebel against a law 
of being, but to submit it to refinement and accom- 
modation or perhaps from sheer curiosity to try 
conclusions with it. The suggestion came first 
from the lower creation, but not from what is 
animal in it; and it was eagerly responded to by 
the woman, the finer and more spiritually awake of 
the pair. Not to press this too far, it is significant 
that the first impulse toward individual initiative 
rises through the free play of intellect and reason. 
It seems to promise a subtler way of being "like 
God." To differentiate more _ minutely the re- 
spective parts of man and wife in the affair, which 
are portrayed in the light of sex distinction, would 
be beyond our present scope. See Eve. 

(5) Two trees "in the midst of the garden" (2 9) 
are mentioned at the outset; but the tree of Mfe, 
the permitted one, seems no more to 
6. The have been thought of until it was no 

Fateful longer accessible (3 22); indeed, when 

Venture the woman speaks to the serpent of 
"the tree which is in the midst of the 
garden" (3 3) she has only one tree in mind, and 
that the prohibited one. The other, as it was 
counted in with their daily fare and opportunity, 
seems to have been put by them with those privileges 
of Ufe which are ignored or postponed; besides, the 
fife it symbolized was the perpetuation of the gar- 
den-life they were living, such life as man would 
live before his spirit was awake to the alternatives 
of hving — a life innocent and blissful, but without 
the stimulus of spiritual reaction. And it was just 
this latter that the alternative of the two trees 
afforded; a reaction fateful for good or evil, needing 
only the impulse that should set the human spirit, 
in motion. Consider the case. If manhood were 
ever to rise from a state of childhood, wherein every- 
thing was done and prescribed for him, into a life 
of free choice and self-moved wisdom, it is hard 
to see how this could have been brought about 
except by something involving inhibition and pro- 
hibition; something that he could not do without 
incurring a risk. This is what the "tree of the 
knowledge of good and evil" (2 17) means. The 
tree by its very name was alike a test and a lure. 
In a sense we may say the temptation began with 
God; but it was not a temptation to evil. Sym- 
bohzed in the two trees, but actual in the oppor- 
tunity of spiritual committal, two ways of life 
stood open before him. On the one hand, it was 
open to him to fortify his spirit in obedience and 
against the lure of perilous knowledge, thus deepen- 
ing and seasoning his negative innocence into posi- 
tive hoHness. That such a course was feasible 
was shown centuries later in the Divine Son 6i Man, 
who in perfect loyalty of the child yet in perfect 
wisdom of adultness fulfilled the primal sinless ideal 
of the fiirst Adam. On the other hand there was 
the lure of the forbidden knowledge, to which the 
serpent gave the false glamor of godlikeness, and 
which could be had by detaching his individual 
will from that of God, and incurring the experience 
of self-seeking, and taking the risk. It was the 
latter that was chosen; this however not in the spu-it 
of rebellion or temptation, but in the desire for a 
good beyond what the childlike limitations of Eden 
afforded (3 6). This then was the first motived 
uprise of the spirit of manhood, taking the initiative 
and acting for itself. So far forth, as the self- 

Adam in OT 
Adam in NT 



assertion of the individual, it was as truly a stage 
of spiritual evolution as if the man had maintained 
obedience; but there was in it the rupture of his 
spirit's union with its personal Source; and the 
hapless committal to self, which is rightly called 
a Fall. So strangely mingled were the spiritual 
elements in this primal manhood initiative. See 
Fall, The. 

(6) The Scripture does not say, or even imply, 
that by this forth-putting of initiative the man 
was committed to a life of sin and 
6. The depravity. This was the idea of a 

Fitted later time. By the nature of the 

Sequel case, however, he was committed to 

the fallibility and unwisdom of his 
own untried nature; in other words, to the perils 
of self-reliance. Naturally, too, the gulf of detach- 
ment from his spiritual Support would tend to 
widen as he trusted himself more exclusively. It 
lay with him and his species to perfect the indi- 
vidual personahty in the freedom which he had 
chosen. And in this the possibilities both upward 
toward godlikeness and downward toward the 
abysms of self were immensely enlarged. Life 
must henceforth be lived on a broader and pro- 
founder scale. But to this end Eden with its tender 
garden nurture can no longer be its habitat, nor 
can man's existence be fitly symbolized by a tree 
from which he has only to take and subsist indefi- 
nitely (3 22). It must encounter hardship and 
sweat and toil; it must labor to subdue a reluctant 
soil to its service (3 17-19) ; it must return at last 
to the dust from which man's body was formed 
(3 19). Yet there is vouchsafed a dim and dis- 
tant presage of ultimate victory over the serpent- 
power, which henceforth is to be man's deadly 
enemy (3 15). At this point of the exposition it 
is that the inchoate manhood is transplanted from 
the garden to the unsubdued world, to work out 
its evolution under the conditions of the human 
species. The pair becomes the family, with its 
family interests and cares; the family becomes the 
, unit of social and organized hfe; the members 
receive individual names (3 20; 5 2); and chrono- 
logically measured history begins. 

///. How Adam Is Recognized in the OT. — 
After the story of Adam is given as far as the birth 
of Cain and Abel (4 1.2) and Seth (4 25), the 
"book of the generations of Adam" begins at 5 1, 
and five verses are taken up with a statistical 
outhne of his life, his offspring, and his 930 years of 
earthly existence. 

(1) Here at Gen 5 5, in the canonical books 
of the OT almost all allusion to him ceases, and 
nothing whatever is made of his 
1. In the fateful relation to the sin and guilt 
OT Ca- of the race. (See Adam in the NT.) 

nonical This latter idea seems to have come 

Books to consciousness only when men's sense 

of sin and a broken law was more 
ingrained than it seems to have been in canonical 
times. In the case of the few allusions that occur, 
moreover, the fact that the name "Adam" is 
identical with the word for "man" makes the 
reference more or less uncertain; one does not 
know whether the patriarch or the race is meant. 
In the Song of Moses (Dt 32), in the clause ver 8, 
"when he separated the children of men" (or 
"Adam"), the reference, which is to the distribution 
of races as given in Gen 10, may or may not have 
Adam in mind. In like manner Zophar's words 
(Job 20 4), "Knowest thou not this of old time, 
since man [or Adam] was placed upon earth?" 
may or may not be recognition by name of the 
first created man. Job's words (31 33), "if like 
Adam I have covered my transgressions," sound 
rather more definite as an allusion to Adam's hiding 

himself after having taken the fruit. When 
Isaiah says (Isa 43 27), "Thy first father sinned," 
it is uncertain whom he means; for in 61 2 he says, 
"Look unto Abraham your father," and Ezekiel 
has told his people (Ezk 16 3), "The Amorite was 
thy father, and thy mother was a Hittite." The 
historical consciousness of the prophets seems to 
have been confined to the history of the Israelitish 

(2) The references in the Apocryphal books 
(Sir, Tob, 2 Esd) deal with Adam's origin, his 

lordship over creation, and in the 
2. In the latest written book with the legacy 
Apocrypha of sin and misery that the race inherits 

from him. The passages in Sir (132 
BC) where he is mentioned are 33 10; 40 1, and 
49 16. Of these the most striking, 40 1, "Great 
travail is created for every man, and a heavy yoke 
is upon the sons of Adam," is hardly to be con- 
strued as a reference to our heritage of his sin. In 
Tob (BC 2d cent.) he is mentioned once (8 6), 
"Thou madest Adam, and gavest him Eve." 
2 Esd, written supposedly some time after 70 AD, 
is of a somber and desponding tone throughout; and 
its references to Adam (2 Esd 3; 4 30; 
6 54; 7 11.46.48) are almost all in lament over 
the evil he has implanted in the race of men by his 
transgression. The first reference (3 5) is rather 
remarkable for its theory of Adam's nature: "And 
[thou] commandedst the dust, and it gave thee 
Adam, a body without a soul, yet it was the work- 
manship of thine hands," etc. His indictment of 
Adam culminates (7 48) in the apostrophe: "O 
thou Adam, what hast thou done? for though it was 
thou that sinned, the evil is not fallen on thee alone, 
but upon all of us that come of thee." 

John Franklin Genung 
[Editorial Note. — The promoters of the Encyclo- 
paedia are not to be understood as endorsing all the views 
set forth in Dr. Genung's article. It was thought right, 
however, that a full and adequate presentation of so 
suggestive an interpretation should be given.) 

ADAM IN THE NT ('A8A|j., Addm): The name 
of Adam occurs nine times (in five different passages) 
in the NT, though several of these are purely 

/. Gospels. — In Lk 3 38 the ancestry of Jesus 
Christ is traced up to Adam, "Adam, the son of 
God," thereby testifying to the acceptance of the 
OT genealogies of Gen. This is the only place in 
the Gospels in which Adam is actually named, 
though there is an allusion to him in Mt 19 4-6 
( = Mk 10 6-8), referring to Gen 1 27 and 2 24. 

//. Epistles. — Adam is used by Paul as the 
founder of the race and the cause of the intro- 
duction of sin in order to point the 
1. Rom comparison and contrast with Christ 
6:12-21 as the Head of the new race and the 
cause of righteousness. The passage 
is the logical center of the ep., the central point to 
which everything that precedes has converged, 
and out of which everjrthing which follows will 
flow. The great ideas of Sin, Death, and Judgment 
are here shown to be involved in the connection of 
the human race with Adam. But over against this 
there is the blessed fact of union with Christ, and 
in this union righteousness and life. The double 
headship of mankind in Adam and Christ shows the 
significance of the work of redemption for the 
entire race. Mankind is ranged under two heads, 
Adam and Christ. There are two men, two acts 
and two results. In this teaching we have the 
spu-itual and theological illustration of the great 
modern principle of soUdarity. There is a solidarity 
of evil and a solidarity of good, but the latter far 
surpasses the former in the quality of the obedience 
of Christ as compared with Adam, and the facts of 



Adam in OT 
Adam in NT 

the work of Christ for justification and life. The 
section is thus no mere episode, or illustration, but 
that which gives organic Ufe to the entire ep. 
Although sin and death are ours in Adam righteous- 
ness and life are ours in Christ, and these latter two 
are infinitely the greater (ver 11) ; whatever we have 
lost in Adam we have more than gained in Christ. 
As all the evils of the race sprang from one man, so 
all the blessings of redemption come from One Per- 
son, and there is such a connection between the 
Person and the race that all men can possess what 
the One has done. In vs 12-19 Paul institutes a 
series of comparisons and contrasts between Adam 
and Christ; the two persons, the two works and the 
two consequences. The fulness of the apostle's 
meaning must be carefully observed. Not only does 
he teach that what we have derived from the first 
Adam is met by what is derived from Christ, but 
the transcendence of the work of the latter is 
regarded as almost infinite in extent. "The full 
meaning of Paul, however, is not grasped until we 
perceive that the benefits received from Christ, the 
Second Adam, are in inverse ratio to the disaster 
entailed by the first Adam. It is the surplusage of 
this grace that in Paul's presentation is commonly 
overlooked" (Mabie, The Divine Reason of the Cross, 

The contrast instituted here between Adam and 
Christ refers to death and hfe, but great difficulty 
turns on the interpretation of the two 
2. 1 Cor "alls." "As in Adam all die, so also in 
15:22 Christ shall all be made alive." Dods 

(Expositor's Bible, 366) interprets it of 
Adam as the source of physical life that ends in 
death, and of Christ as the source of spiritual life 
that never dies. "All who are by physical deriva- 
tion truly united to Adam incur the death, which 
by sinning he introduced into human experience; 
and similarly, all who by spiritual affinity are in 
Christ enjoy the new life which triumphs over 
death, and which he won." So also Edwards, who 
does not consider that there is any real unfairness 
in interpreting the former "all" as more extensive 
than the latter, "if we bear in mind that the con- 
ditions of entrance into the one class and the other 
are totally different. They, are not stated here. 
But we have them in Rom 5 5-11, where the 
apostle seems as if he anticipated this objection to 
the analogy which he instituted between Adam and 
Christ. Both alike are heads of humanity, but 
they are unlike in this (as also in other things, Rom 
6 15), that men are in Adam by nature, in Christ 
by faith" (Corinthians, 412). Godet considers that 
"perhaps this interpretation is really that which 
corresponds best to the apostle's view," and he 
shows that zoopoieisthai, "to be made alive," is a 
more Hmited idea than egeiresthai, "to be raised, 
the limitation of the subject thus naturally pro- 
ceeding from the special meaning of the verb itself. 
"The two pdntes (all) embrace those only to whom 
each of the two powers extends." But Godet favors 
the view of Meyer and EUicott that "all" is to be 
given the same interpretation in each clause, and 
that the reference is to all who are to rise, whether 
for life or condemnation, and that this is to be in 
Christ": "Christ will quicken all; all will hear His 
voice and will come forth from the grave, but not all 
to the true 'resurrection of life': see Jn 6 29 (EUi- 
cott, Corinthians, 301). Godet argues that there 
is nothing to prevent the word 'quicken, taken 
alone, from being used to denote restoration to the 
fuhiess of spmtual and bodily existence, with a 
view either to perdition or salvation" (Corinthians, 
355) . There are two serious difficulties to the latter 
interpretation: (1) The invariable meaning of 
"in Christ" is that of spiritual union; (2) the ques- 
tion whether the resurrection of the wicked really 

finds any place in the apostle's argument in the 
entire chapter. 

"The first man Adam became a living soul. The 
last Adam became a life-giving spirit." The ref- 
erence to Adam is from Gen 2 7; the 

3. 1 Cor reference to Christ is due to the fact of 
16:46 what He had done and was doing in 

His manifestation as Divine Redeemer. 
Behind results the apostle proceeds to nature. Adam 
was simply a Uving being; Christ a life-giving Being. 
Thus Christ is called Adam as expressive of His 
Headship of a race. In this ver He is called the 
"last" Adam, while in ver 47 the "second." In 
the former ver the apostle deals not so much with 
Christ's relation to the first Adam as to the part He 
takes in relation to humanity, and His work on its 
behalf. When precisely Christ became life-giving 
is a matter of difference of opinion. Rom 1 4 as- 
sociates power with the resurrection as the time 
when Christ was constituted Son of God for the 
purpose of bestowing the force of Divine grace. 
This gift of power was only made available for His 
church through the Ascension and the gift of the 
Holy Spirit at Pentecost. It is possible that the 
word "life-giving" may also include a reference to 
the resurrection of the body hereafter. 

Paul uses the creation of man and woman in his 
argument for the subordination of woman (Gen 2 

7-25). This is no mere Jewish reason- 

4. 1 Tim ing, but an inspired statement of the 
2:13.14 typical meaning of the passage in Gen. 

The argument is a very similar one to 
that in 1 Cor 11 8.9. When the apostle states 
that "Adam was not beguiled," we must apparently 
understand it as simply based on the text in Gen 
to which he refers (Gen 3 13), in which Eve, 
not Adam, says, "The serpent beguiled me." In 
Gal 3 16 he reasons similarly from "seed" in the 
singular number, just as He 7 reasons from the 
silence of Gen 14 in regard to the parentage of 
Melchizedek. Paul does not deny that Adam was 
deceived, but only that he was not directly de- 
ceived. His point is that Eve's facility in yielding 
warrants the rule as to women keeping silence. 

"And Enoch, the seventh from Adam" (Gen 6). 

Bigg says that the quotation which follows is a 

combination of passages from Enoch, 

5. Jude though the allusion to Enoch himself 
ver 14 is evidently based on the story in 

///. Conclusions. — As we review the use of 
"Adam" in the NT, we cannot fail to observe that 
Paul assumes that Adam was a historical person- 
ality, and that the record in Gen was a record of 
facts, that sin and death were introduced into the 
world and affected the entire race as the penalty 
of the disobedience of one ancestor. Paul evidently 
takes it for granted that Adam knew and was 
responsible for what he was doing. Again, sin and 
death are regarded as connected, that death ob- 
tains its moral quality from sin. Paul clearly 
beUeved that physical dissolution was due to sin, 
and that there is some causal connection between 
Adam and the human race in regard to physical 
death. While the reference to death in Rom 5 as 
coming through sin, is primarily to physical death, 
yet physical death is the expression and sign of the 
deeper idea of spiritual death; and even though 
physical death was in the world before Adam it was 
only in connection with sin that its moral meaning 
and estimate became clear. Whether we are to 
interpret, "for that all sinned," as sinning when 
Adam sinned, or sinning as the result of an inher- 
ited tendency from Adam, the entire passage imphes 
some causal connection between him and them. 
The need of redemption is thus made by the apostle 
to rest on facts. We are bound to Adam by bu-th, 




and it is open to us to become bound to Christ by 
faith. If we refuse to exchange our position in 
Adam for that which is offered to us in Christ we 
become answerable to God; this is the ground of 
moral freedom. The NT assumption of our com- 
mon ancestry in Adam is true to the facts of evo- 
lutionary science, and the universaUty of sin 
predicated is equally true to the facts of human 
experience. Thus redemption is grounded on the 
teaching of Scripture, and confirmed by the uncon- 
tradicted facts of history and experience. Whether, 
therefore, the references to Adam in the NT are 
purely incidental, or elaborated in theological 
discussion, everything is evidently based on the 
record in Gen. W. H. Geifpith Thomas 

ADAM, BOOKS OF: Books pretending to give 
the life and deeds of Adam and other OT worthies 
existed in abundance among the Jews and the early 
Christians. The Talm speaks of a Book of Adam, 
which is now lost, but which probably furnished 
some of the material which appears in early Chris- 
tian writings. The Vita Adami was tr"^ from the 
Ethiopic by Dillmann (1853), and into English by 
Malan (The Book of Adam and Eve, London, 1882). 
The Testament of Adam is a portion of the Vita 
Adami (published by Renan in 1853) and so prob- 
ably is the Diathtke ton Proto-pldsion (Fabricius, II, 
83). See Apocalyptic Liter atueb; Apocrypha. 

M. O. Evans 

ADAM, CITY OF (Dns, 'adham, "red" or 
BDB "made") : A city in the middle of the Jordan 
vaUey near Zarethan (Josh 3 16), which see. The 
name probably survives at the Damieh Ford, near 
the mouth of the Jabbok twenty miles above 
Jericho. An Arabian historian asserts that about 
1265 AD the Jordan was here blocked by a land 
shde. The inner gorge of the Jordan is here narrow 
with high banks which would facilitate such an 
obstruction as permitted the waters to "pile up" 
above to Adam and run out below, permitting 
Joshua's host to cross on dry land {SWP, II, 15; 
Wright, SCOTH, 130-34). 

George Frederick Wright 

ADAMAH, ad'a-ma (np"5<, 'ddhamdh; 'ASajit, 
Adami): A fortified city in the territory of Naph- 
tali, named between Chinnereth and Ramah (Josh 
19 36). It is probably identical with the modern 
'Admah, a ruin on the plateau about 10 miles N. of 

ADAMANT, ad'a-mant (T'^lB, shamlr [Ezk 3 
9; Zee 7 12]): In the passages cited and in Jer 
17 1, where it is rendered "diamond," the word 
shamlr evidently refers to a hard stone. The word 
adamant ("unconquerable") is used in the early 
Gr writers for a hard metal, perhaps steel, later for 
a metal Uke gold and later for the diamond. The 
Heb shamlr, the Gr adamas (from which word 
diamond as well as adamant is derived) and the 
Eng. adamant occur regularly in fig. expressions. 
All three are equally indefinite. Adamant may 
therefore be considered a good tr for shamlr, 
though the LXX does not use adamas in the pas- 
sages cited. There is a possible etymological 
identification of shamlr with the Gr smyris (smarts 
or smiris), emery, a granular form of corundum 
well known to the ancients and used by them for 
polishing and engraving precious stones. Corun- 
dum in all its forms, including the sapphire and 
ruby, is in the scale of hardness next to the diamond. 
In EV Isa 5 6; 7 23-25; 9 18; 10 17; 27 4; 
32 13, shamlr is tr'' brier. See also Stones, Precious. 

Alfred Ely Day 

ADAMI, ad'a-ml; a-da'ml: Mentioned in AV as a 
separate name, where RV has Adami-nekeb, which 
see (Josh 19 33). 

ADAMI-NEKEB, ad'a-mi ne'keb (3]?3n '•'anij, 
'ddhaml ha-nekebh, "the ground of the piercing," 
that is of the pass, or defile) : A place mentioned in 
indicating the border of Naphtali (Josh 19 33). 
In AV Adami and Nekeb are given as separate 
names, and it is an open question which view of the 
matter is correct. Most of the Gr texts give the 
names as two. The Vulg has "Adami quae est 
Neceb." The Jerusalem Talm gives two names, 
though instead of Hannekeb or Nekeb it has 
Slyaddthah (Meg 1 1, or Neubauer's Geog du Talm, 
225). In the list of places conquered by Thothmes 
III of Egypt occurs the name NKBU (Tomkins, 
Bee of Past, new series, V, 47), which seems to be 
the same with Nekeb. 

The Kst of names for the border of Naphtali 
(Josh 19 33.34) has no name in common with the 
list of cities (vs 35-38) unless Adami and Adamah 
are the same. The PE Survey maps locate Ada- 
mah at Damieh, about seven miles northwest of the 
exit of the Jordan from the Lake of Galilee, and 
Adami at Khurbet Adamah, five or six miles south 
of the exit. Conder, Tomkins and others place 
Adami at Damieh, and identify Nekeb by its 
Talmudic name in the neighboring ruin Seiyddeh. 
Conder says (art. "Nekeb," HDB) that the "pass" 
implied in the name Nekeb "is probably one leading 
from the eastern precipices near Tiberias." 

Willis J. Bebcheb 

ADAN, a'dan. See Addan. 

ADAR, a'dar (^~S1 , 'ddhdr, meaning uncertain) : 
The Bab name of the twelfth month of the year. 
Used in the Bible only in Ezr 6 15 and eight times 
in Est. At first the author in Est defines Adar as 
the twelfth month, but afterward omits the nu- 
meral. In order to maintain the relation of the year 
to the seasons it was customary to add a second 
Adar, as often as was needed, as an intercalary 

ADAR, a'dar: In AV (Josh 15 3) for Addab, 

which see. 

ADARSA, a-dar'sa. See Adasa. 

ADASA, ad'a-sa ('ASao-d, Adasd; AV Adarsa): 
A town less than four miles from Beth-horon (30 
furlongs Ant, ZII, x, 5; 1 Mace 7 40) and a day's 
journey from Gazara (1 Mace 7 45), where Judas 
Maceabee defeated and killed Nicanor, a general of 
Demetrius (1 Mace 7 40 ff). The ruin of Adaseh 
nearGibeon {SWP, III, XVII). 

ADBEEL, ad'bS-el (bSSnS, 'adh¥'el, "God's 
discipline," possibly): The third of the twelve sons 
of Ishmael (Gen 25 13; 1 Ch 1 29). The name 
appears in the Assyr records as that of a north 
Arabian tribe residing somewhere S.W. of the 
Dead Sea. 


(1) liri8iaTd(r<ro), epidiatdssomai, "to add to," 
"to arrange in addition" : Found only in Gal 3 15, 
which may thus be paraphrased : "To take a familiar 
illustration: even a man's will, when ratified, no 
third party may annul or supplement" (Dummelow, 
in loc). 

(2) eiriT(9T)|ii, epitithemi, "to put upon," "If 
any man shall add unto them, God shall add 
unto him the plagues" (Rev 22 18). The book is 
not to be falsified by addition or excision (see 
Book) by the interpolation of unauthorized doc- 
trines or the neglect of essential ones (cf Dt 4 2; 
12 32). See also Impart; Supply. 

M. O. Evans 
ADDAN, ad'an Q'^ii, 'addan; in Neh fi'^if. , 
'addon; connected in some way with the name of 



the god Addu) : A name mentioned in the list of the 
returning exiles (Ezr 2 59, duplicated in Neh 7 61). 
It is one of several names of Bab localities from 
which came men who were unable to declare their 
genealogy as Israelites. 

ADDAR, ad'ar ("I'lN, 'addar, "glorious." See 

(1) A grandson of Benjamin, sometimes counted 
as one of his sons (1 Ch 8 3). 

(2) A town on the southern border of Judah (Josh 
15 3, AV "Adar"). The same as Hazar-addar (Nu 
34 4). 

ADDER, ad'er (D^IBD?,. 'akhshubh [Ps 140 3]; 
"ins , pethen [Ps 58 4] ; ' "iSiyBa , (iph'onl [Prov 
23 321; 1B"'S1C, sh'phiphon [Gen 49 17]; SSS, 
gepha' [AVm; Isa 14 29]): This word is used for 
several Heb originals. In each case a poisonous 
serpent is clearly indicated by the context. It is 

Hooded Snake. Length about 4 feet. 

impossible to tell in any case just what species is 
meant, but it must be remembered that the Eng. 
word adder is used very ambiguously. It is from 
the Anglo-Saxon ncedre, a snake or serpent, and 
is the common Eng. name for Vipera berusAj, the 
common viper, which is found throughout Europe 
and northern Asia, though not in Bible lands; but 
the word adder is also used for various snakes, 
both poisonous and non-poisonous, found in differ- 
ent parts of the world. In America, for instance, 
both the poisonous moccasin (Andstrodon) and the 
harmless hog-nosed snakes (Helerodon) are called 
adders. See Serpent. Alfred E^y Day 

ADDI, ad'I ('A88C, Addi; 'A88e£, Addd): An 
ancestor of Joseph, the husband of Mary, mother of 
Jesus; fourth from Zerubbabel in the ascendmg 
genealogical series (Lk 3 28). 

ADDICT, a-dikt': Found only in AV of 1 Cor 16 

15, for Gr T(£(7irw, tdsso. The house of Stephanus is 
said to be "addicted to the ministry of the saints," 
i.e. they have so "arranged" their affairs as to make 
of this service a prime object; RV "set themselves 
to minister." 

ADDO, ad'o (A, 'A88.4, Addd; B, 'E8S€[v, 
Eddein) = Udo (Ezr 5 1; 6 14): The father (Zee 
117 grandfather) of Zechariah the prophet (1 Esd 
6 1). 

ADDON, ad'on. See Addan. 

ADDUS, ad'us ('ASSotis, AddoHs) : The descend- 
ants of A. (sons of Solomon's servants) returned 
with Zerubbabel to Jerusalem (1 Esd 5 34). Omit- 
ted in Ezr 2 and Neh 7. 

ADER, a'der: Used in 1 Ch 8 15 AV for Eder, 
which see. 

ADIABENE, a-di-a-be'n5 ('A8ia|3t|v^, Adiabent) : 
A state lying on the east of the Tigris, on the 
greater and lesser rivers Zab, in the territory of 
ancient Assyria. For the half-century terminating 
with the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus, Adia- 
bene is especially interesting by reason of the 
careers of its king, Izates, and his mother Helena, 
who became Jews. They had their part in the 
Jewish-Roman wars, and in various ways were 
typical of the existing situation. (See Ant, XX, 
2-5; BJ.II, xvi, 4; xix. 2; V, iv, 2; vi. 1; xi. 5; VI, 
vi, 4.) Somewhat later Adiabene was absorbed 
into the Roman Empire and became one of the six 
provinces which formed the larger province of 
Assyria, though Pliny and Ammianus sometimes 
call the large province by the name Adiabene. 

Willis J. Beecher 

ADIDA, ad'i-da ('A8i8d, Adidd) : A town of the 
Benjamin tribe near Lod and Ono located upon a 
hill facing the "plain country" of Judaea, rebuilt 
and fortified by Simon ISIaccabee (1 IMacc 12 38), 
who later encamped here to meet the army of Try- 
phon (1 IVIacc 13 13; Ant, XIII, vi, 5). It was 
also here that Aretas, king of Arabia, met Alexan- 
der Janneus in battle and defeated him {Ant, XIII, 
XV, 2). Perhaps the El-Haditheh of today located 
about three miles east of Lydda or Lod. See 

ADIEL, ad'i-el (bs{iiy, 'ddhi'el "ornament of 

(1) One of the "princes" of the tribe of Simeon, 
who, in the days of Hezekiah, smote the aborigines 
of Gedor and captured the valley (1 Ch 4 36 ff). 

(2) Father of Maasai, one of the priests who 
dwelt in Jerusalem after the return from the Exile 
(1 Ch 9 12). 

(3) Father of Azmaveth who was over David's 
treasures (1 Ch 27 25). 

ADIN, a'din (Vl^ , 'adhln, "adorned"): The 
name of af3,mily, "the sons of Adin" (Ezr 2 15; 8 6; 
Neh 7 20; 10 16; 1 Esd 5 14; 8 32), mentioned 
among the returning exiles. The list in Ezr 2 
is placed in the midst of the narrative concerning 
Zerubbabel, but its title and its contents show that 
it also includes the later Jewish immigrants into 
Pal. The hst in Neh 7 is a duplicate of that in 
Ezr, but with variations; most of the variations 
are naturally accounted for by supposing that one 
copy was made later than the other and was 
brought up to date. In Ezr and 1 Esd the number 
of the sons of Adin is said to be 454; in Neh it is 
655. The 50 males, led by Ebed the son of Jona- 
than, who came with Ezr, may or may not have 
been included in the numbers just mentioned. 
Among the names of those who sealed the cove- 
nant along with Neh are 44 that are placed under 
the caption "the chiefs of the people" (Neh 10 
14^26), and nearly half of these are the family 
names of the list in Ezr 2 and Neh 7. It is nat- 
ural to infer that in these oases a family sealed the 
covenant collectively through some representative. 
In that case the Adin here mentioned is the same 
that is mentioned in the other places. See also 
^Dijjtr. Willis J. Beecher 

ADINA, ad'i-na, a-di'na (Sr"!?> '^dhina', 
"adorned"): "Adina the son of Shiza the Reu- 
benite, a chief of the Reubenites, and thirty with 
him" (1 Ch 11 42). This is in that part of the 
list of David's mighty men in which the Chronicler 
supplements the list given in 2 S. 




ADINO, ad'i-no, a-dl'no (1311?, 'adhlno, "his 
adorned one"): The senior of David's "mighty 
men." "Josheb-basshebeth a Tahchemonite, chief 
of the captains; the same was Adino the Eznite, 
against eight hundred slain at one time" (2 S 
23 8). This very exact rendering makes it evident 
even to an English reader that the text is imper- 
fect. Ginsbm-g offers a corrected form taken 
substantially from the parallel passage in 1 Ch 11 
11: "Jashobeam a son of a Hachmonite, chief of 
the captains; he hfted up his spear." This is 
plausible, and is very generally accepted, and elimi- 
nates the names Adino and Eznite, which do not 
occur elsewhere in the Bible. Some of the facts 
are against this. The Sept has the names Adino 
and Eznite. The Lat finds no proper names in the 
passage, but so translates the words as to presup- 
pose the Heb text as we have it. It may be a case 
for suspended judgment. 

The texts concerning David's mighty men are 
fragmentary both in S and in Ch. If they were 
more complete they would perhaps make it clear 
that the three seniors were comrades of David at 
Pas-dammim, Ephes-dammim (1 Ch 11 13; 1 S 
17 1); and that we have in them additional details 
concerning that battle. The record says that on 
the death of Goliath the PhiUstines fled and the 
Israehtes pursued (1 S 17 52 ff), but it is not 
improbable that during the retreat portions of the 
Phili force rallied, so that there was strenuous 
fighting. Willis J. Beecher 

ADINU, ad'i-nu, ADIN ('ASivov, AdinM, 1 Esd 
5 14; 'ASCv, Adin, 1 Esd 8 32): Cf Adin (Ezr 2 
15; 8 6; Neh 7 20; 10 16). The descendants of 
A. (leaders of the nation) returned with their 
families to Jerus : one party being with Zerubbabel 
(454 members 1 Esd 6 14), a second party with 
Ezra (250 members 1 Esd 8 32). 

ADINTJS, ad'i-nus. See Iadinus (Apoc). 

ADITHAIM, ad-i-tha'im (d'^n"'"!?, 'ddhithayim 
"double ornament, passage, or prey"): A city in 
"the lowland" (Shephelah, not as AV "valley") of 
Judah (Josh 15 36). Site unknown, but possibly 
same as Adida (q.v.). 

ADJURATION, ad-ju-ra'shun: The act of re- 
quiring or taking a solemn oath. In a time of 
military peril Saul adjured the people C^J^^, 'sldh, 
"to take oath") and they took oath by saying 
"Amen" (1 S 14 24). When Joshua pronounced 
a ban on Jericho (Josh 6 26) he completed it with 
an oath (y?lp , sha,bha\ "to cause to swear"). Often 
used in the sense of a solemn charge without the 
administration of an oath (1 K 22 16; 2 Ch 18 15; 
Cant 2 7; 5 8.9; 1 Thess 5 27). With reference 
to the withholding of testimony, see Lev 5 1 and 
Prov 29 24. The high priest sought to put Jesus 
under oath (i^opKl^o), exorkizo, "to force to an 
oath," Mt 26 63). Adjure also means to solemnly 
implore (opKt^ca, horkizo) as when the man with an 
unclean spirit appealed to Jesus: "I adjure thee by 
God, torment me not" (Mk 5 7); or seven sons of 
Sceva, exorcists, sought in the name of Jesus to expel 
demons (Acts 19 13). 

(1) The exacting of an oath has, from time imme- 
morial, been a customary procedure in conferring 
civil and ecclesiastical office and in taking legal 
testimony. Though often allowed to become 
painfully trivial and a travesty on its inherent 
solemnity, the taking of an official oath or the 
swearing of witnesses is still considered essential 
to the moral integrity of government, secular or 
spiritual. False swearing, under solemn oath, con- 

stitutes the guilt and heinousness of perjury. The 
universality of oath-taking is humanity's tribute, 
whether pagan or Christian, to the sacredness of 

(2) Civihzed nations administer oaths imder three 
heads: political, ecclesiastical, legal. The sov- 
ereign of England receives the crown only as he or 
she responds affirmatively to the solemn adjuration 
of the archbishop or bishop: "Will you solemnly 
promise and swear to govern," etc, closing with the 
affirmation, "So help me God." A fundamental 
conviction of civilized nations was expressed by 
Lycurgus : "An oath is the bond that keeps the state 
together." It is the most solemn appeal to the in- 
violability of the human conscience, and the sacred- 
ness of a vow as witnessed both by God and men. 
See also Oath. Dwiqht M. Pratt 

ADLAI, ad'lS-i, ad'll 0^1?, 'adhlay; LXX 
'A8XC, Adli and 'ASat, Adat^ "lax, weary"): The 
father of Shaphat, an overseer of David's herds in 
the lowlands (1 Ch 27 29). 

ADMAH, ad'ma (ITpHSI , 'adhrnuh) : From a root 
signifying red; one of the Cities of the Plain (Cic- 
car) (Gen 10 19; 14 2.8; Dt 29 23; Hos 11 8) 
upon which Abraham and Lot looked from the 
heights of Bethel; destroyed with Sodom and 
Gomorrah. Conder tentatively identifies it with 
the City of Adam referred to in Josh 3 16, and 
thinks that perhaps the name may be preserved 
in that of Damieh Ford, near the mouth of the 
river Jabbok; but that point could not have been 
in view from Bethel. See Vale of Siddim. 

ADMATHA, ' ad'ma-tha, ad-ma' tha (SJlpIS , 
'adhmatha'): One of "the seven princes of Persia 
and Media, who saw the king's face, and sat first 
in the kingdom" (Est 1 14); cf 2 K 26 19; Ezr 
7 14. The LXX gives only three names. 

ADMIN, ad'min. See Arni. 

ADMINISTER, ad-min'is-ter (Siokov^w, dia- 
hon&o), ADMINISTRATION, ad-min-is-tra'shun 
(SioKovCo, diakonia): Terms used in AV in 
1 Cor 12 5; 2 Cor 8 19.20; 2 Cor 9 12 respec- 
tively, and replaced in RV by "minister" and 
"ministration." The root idea of both words is 
"service," hence to supply, or conduct or attend 
to anything; the performance of official duty, the 
conduct of affairs, the various forms of spiritual 
or social service. "Minister," used either of an 
act or of an office, is the term that best represents 
the apostohc thought and ideal. 

DwiGHT M. Pratt 
ADMIRATION, ad-mi-ra'shun (eaOjia, thaiima, 
"a marvel" or "wonder"; 6au(idJ(D, thaumdzo, "to 
wonder"): A term thrice used in AV in the NT, 
to express a wonder that includes approval, high 
esteem; replaced in RV by three renderings better 
suited to convey the various kinds of surprise, 
wonder, admiration, expressed by this fertile 
word: viz. in 2 Thess 1 10, "to be admired," 
reads m RV "to be marvelled at"; in Jude ver 16 
"having men's persons in admiration" is rendered 
"showing respect of persons"; in Rev 17 6 "won- 
dered with great admiration" is replaced by "with a 
great wonder." The Gr original is used frequently 
in the NT, esp. in the Gospels, to express marvel 
and wonder at the supernatural works of Jesus. 

DwiGHT M. Pratt 
ADNA, ad'na (SSI?, 'cdhna', "pleasure"; Al- 
Saiv^, Aidaird): 

(1) An IsraeUte in Ezra's time who, having mar- 
ried a foreign wife, divorced her. He belonged to 
Pahath-moab (Ezr 10 30). 




(2) A priest of the family of Harum, during the 
high-priesthood of Joiakim son of Jethua (Neh 12 

ADNAH, ad'na (HJ"!?, 'adhndh, "pleasure"; 
'E8v«i, Ednd): 

(1) A warrior of the tribe of Manasseh, who 
deserted Saul and joined David's forces at Ziklag 
(1 Ch 12 20.21). 

(2) An officer of high rank, perhaps the command- 
er-in-chief of Jehoshaphat's army (2 Ch 17 14). 
Here the spelling in Heb is HJ"]? , 'adhndh. 

ADO, a-doo': Found only in Mk 5 39 AV: 
"Why make ye this ado and weep?" Here "make 
ado" is used to translate the Gr verb Sopv^^o/iai., 
thoruMomai . (cf Mt 9 23 AV, where it is like- 
wise rendered "making a noise"). "Ado" as a 
subst. is OE for "trouble" or "fuss," used only 
in the sing.; and in the early Eng. VSS it com- 
bined well with the verb "make," as here, to trans- 
late the Gr word rendered elsewhere "causing an 
uproar," or "tumult," "making a noise," etc 
(see Acts 17 5; 20 10). Cf Shakespeare, Romeo 
and Juliet, III, 4, "We'll keep no great ado; — a 
friend or two." Geo. B. Eager 

ADONAI, a-do'ni, ad-o-na'i Oj'lS!, 'MhSnay): 
A Divine name, tr'' "Lord," and signifying, from 
its derivation, "sovereignty." Its vowels are 
found in the MT with the unpronounceable tetra- 
grammaton mrT^ ; and when the Heb reader came 
to these letters, he always substituted in pronun- 
ciation the word '"ddhonay." Its vowels combined 
with the tetragrammaton form the word "Jehovah." 
See God, Names op. 

ADONIBEZEK, a-do-ni-be'zek (pTaijhS, 
'ddhombhezek, "lord of Bezek"): Lord of a town, 
Bezek, in southern Palestine, whom the tribes of 
Judah and Simeon overthrew. Adonibezek fled 
when his men were defeated, but was captured, 
and was punished for his cruelty in cutting off the 
thumbs and great toes of seventy kings by a similar 
mutilation. Being brought to Jerusalem, he died 
there (Jgs 1 5-7). This not to be confused with 
Adonizedek, as in the LXX. This is quite another 

ADONIJAH, ad-o-nl'ja (in«?^X or H^dHX, 
ddhoniyahu or 'ddhomyah, "my lord is Jehovah") : 

(1) The son of David and Haggith, the fourth of 
David's sons, bom in Hebron after David became 
king of Judah, principally known for his attempt 
to become king instead of Solomon (2 S 3 4; 
1 Ch 3 2; 1 K 1 and 2). The record gives no 
details concerning Chileab, the son of David and 
Abigail. Leaving him out, Adonijah was the oldest 
living son of David, after the death of Amnon and 
Absalom. ., , 

In treating the record it has been needlessly 
obscured by neglecting or distorting the time data. 
It says that the rebeUion of Absalom broke out 
"at an end of forty years" (2 S 16 7). The 
natural meaning is not forty years after the last- 
mentioned preceding date, but at the close of the 
fortieth calendar year of the reign of David. As 
David reigned 40J years (2 S 5 4.5), the close of 
his fortieth calendar year was the beginning of his 
last year. That the date intended was at the be- 
ginning of a vernal year is confirmed by the ref- 
erences to the season (2 S 17 19.28). Instead of 
giving this number Jos says that 4 years had 
elapsed since the last preceding date, which is very 
likely correct. ,. i 

Many considerations show that the outbreak 
cannot have occurred much earlier than the fortieth 

year of David; for Amnon and Absalom were born 
after David's reign began, and were men with 
estabUshments of their own before Amnon's offence 
against Tamar, and after that the record, if we 
accept the numeral of Jos, accounts for 2 plus 
3 plus 2 plus 4, that is, for 11 years (2 S 13 23.38; 
14 28; Ant, VII, ix, 1). In the year following 
David's fortieth year there was ample room for the 
rebelUons of Absalom and of Sheba, the illness of 
David, the attempt of Adonijah, and the beginning 
of the reign of Solomon. All things confirm the 
number forty as giving the date of the outbreak. 
The common assumption that the forty is to be 
reduced to four, on the basis of the number in 
Jos, is contrary to the evidence. 

On this view of the chronology all the events 
fall into line. David's idea of making Solomon 
king was connected with his temple-building idea. 
This is implied in K, and presented somewhat in 
full in Ch. The preparations described in Ch 
(I Ch 22-29) seem to have culminated in David's 
fortieth year (1 Ch 26 31). David's policy was 
not altogether popular with the nation. His 
assembly (1 Ch 28 1) is mostly made up of 
sarim and other appointed officials, the hereditary 
Israelitish "princes" and "elders" being con- 
spicuous by their absence. The outbreak under 
Absalom was mainly a matter of skilful manipu- 
lation; the hearts of the people were really with 
David. And yet the party of Absalom was dis- 
tinctly a legitimist party. It believed in the 
succession of the eldest son, and it objected to 
many things in the temple-building policy. Joab 
and Abiathar and others sympathized with this 
party, but they remained with David out of per- 
sonal loyalty to him. 

The Absalom campaign began early in the calen- 
dar year. There is no reason to think that it lasted 
more than a few weeks. Later in the year a few 
weeks are enough time to allow for the campaign 
against Sheba. Joab must have been more or less 
alienated from David by David's appointment of 
Amasa to supersede him. Then came David's 
serious illness. Abishag was brought in, not to 
"attend upon David during his declining years," 
but to put her vitality at his disposal during a few 
weeks. Joab and Abiathar did not believe that 
David would ever do business again. Their per- 
sonal loyalty to him no longer restrained them from 
following their own ideas, even though these were 
contrary to his wishes. 

The narrative does not represent that Nathan 
and Bathsheba influenced David to interfere in 
behalf of Solomon; it represents that they suc- 
ceeded in arousing him from his torpor, so that he 
carried out his own wishes and intentions. Per- 
haps resting in bed had done something for him. 
The treatment by Abishag had not been unsuccess- 
ful. And now a supreme appeal to his mind proved 
sufficient to arouse him. He became himself again, 
and acted with his usual vigor and wisdom. 

Adonijah is described as a handsome and showy 
man, but his conduct does not give us a high opinion 
of his capabilities. He had no real command of 
the respect of the guests who shouted "Live King 
Adonijah." When they heard that Solomon had 
been crowned, they "were afraid, and rose up, and 
went every man his way." Adonijah made his 
submission, but afterward attempted to engage in 
intrigues, and was put to death. 

(2) One of the Levites sent out by Jehoshaphat, 
in his third year, with the Book of the Law, to give 
instruction in Judah (2 Ch 17 8). 

(3) One of the names given, under the heading 
"the chiefs of the people," of those who sealed the 
covenant along with Nehemiah (Neh 10 16). 

Willis J. Beechee 




ADONIKAM, ad-o-ni'kam (D|?13"IS , 'ddhomkdm, 
"my lord has risen up"): The name of a family 
of the returning exiles (Ezr 2 13; Neh 7 18). 
"The sons of Adonikam," men and women and 
children, numbered 666 according to the list as given 
in Ezr, but 667 according to the copy in Neh. 
Either included among these or in addition to them 
was the contingent that came with Ezr, "Ehphalet, 
Jeuel, and Shemaiah, and with them 60 males" 
(Ezr 8 13). 

ADONIRAM, ad-o-nl'ram (D^''5'^i|l , 'adhonlram, 
"my lord is exalted"): An official of Solomon 
(1 K 4 6; 5 14). Near the close of the reign of 
David, and at the opening of the reign of Reho- 
boam, the same office was held by Adoram (2 S 
20 24; 1 K 12 18). The name Adoram seems 
to be a contraction of Adoniram, and doubtless 
the same person held the office in all the three 
reigns. The name also appears as Hadoram 
(2 Ch 10 18). In AV and RV the office is vari- 
antly described as "over the tribute," which is 
misleading, and "over the levy," which is correct, 
though obscure. In ARV it is uniformly "over the 
men subject to taskwork." Adoniram was at the 
head of the department of forced labor for the 
government. The record is to the effect that 
peoples conquered by Israel, excepting the Canaan- 
ites, were to be spared, subject to the obligation to 
forced labor on the public works (Dt 20 11); 
that this law was actually extended to the Canaan- 
ites (Josh 16 10; 17 13; Jgs 1 28 ff); that David, 
in his preparations for the temple, organized and 
handed over to Solomon a service of forced labor 
(1 Ch 22 2.15, etc); that under Solomon this 
service was elaborately maintained (1 K 5 13 if; 
9 15ff; 2 Ch 8 7ff). It was not for the temple 
only, but for all Solomon's numerous building 
enterprises. In theory men of Israelitish blood 
were free from this burden, but practically they 
found it a burden and a grievance. At the acces- 
sion of Rehoboam they protested against it (1 K 
12; 2 Ch 10). Nothing in the account is more 
indicative of Rehoboam's utter lack of good judg- 
ment than his sending his veteran superintendent 
of the forced labor department to confer with the 
people. The murder of Adoniram, and the ig- 
nominious flight of Rehoboam, were natural conse- 
quences. Willis J. Beecher 

ADONIS, a-do'nis: A name for the Bab god 
Tammuz, which see. The word occurs only in 
ERVm of Isa 17 10, where for "pleasant plants" 
is read "plantings of Adonis." The ARV rightly 
omits this marginal suggestion. 

ADONI-ZEDEK, a-do-m-ze'dek (p-^^D^TS, 'ddhs- 
nl^edhek, "lord of righteousness"): Ring of Jerus 
at the time of the conquest of Canaan (Josh 10 1). 
When he heard of the fall of Ai and the submission 
of the Gibeonites, he entered into a league with 
four other kings to resist Joshua and Israel, and 
to punish Gibeon (Josh 10 3.4), but was over- 
thrown by Joshua in a memorable battle Cvs 12-14). 
Adoni-zedek and his four allies were shut up in a 
cave, while the battle lasted, and afterward were 
taken out by Joshua's order, put to death and 
hanged on trees (Josh 10 22-27). It is noticeable 
that the name is almost the equivalent of Mel- 
chizedek, p"2''3^'P , malkigedhek, "king of righteous- 
ness," who was ruler of Jerus in the time of Abra- 
ham. Edward Mack 

ADOPTION, a-dop'shun («lo8£(r£a, huioihesia, 
"placing as a son"): 

I. The General Legal Idea 

1. In the OT 

2. Greek 

3. Roman 

II. Paul's Doctrine 

1. In Gal as Liberty 

2. In Rom as Deliverance from Debt 
III. The Christian Experience 

1. In Relation to Justification 

2. In Relation to Sanctiflcation 

3. In Relation to Regeneration 
IV. As God's Act 

1. Divine Fatherhood 

2. Its Cosmic Range 

This term appears first in NT, and only in 
the epp. of Paul (Gal 4 5; Rom 8 15.23; 9 4; 
Eph 1 5) who may have coined it out of a famihar 
Gr phrase of identical meaning. It indicated 
generally the legal process by which a man might 
bring into his family, and endow with the status 
and privileges of a son, one who was not by nature 
his son or of his kindred. 

/. The General Legal Idea. — The custom pre- 
vailed among Greeks, Romans and other ancient 
peoples, but it does not appear in Jewish law. 

Three cases of adoption are mentioned : of Moses 

(Ex 2 10), Genubath (1 K 11 20) and Esther 

(Est 2 7.15), but it is remarkable 

1. In the OT that they all occur outside of Pal- 

in Egypt and Persia, where the prac- 
tice of adoption prevailed. Likewise the idea 
appears in the NT only in the epistles of Paul, 
which were addressed to churches outside Pal. 
The motive and initiative of adoption always lay 
with the adoptive father, who thus supplied his 
lack of natural offspring and satisfied the claims of 
affection and religion, and the desire to exercise 
paternal authority or to perpetuate his family. 
The process and conditions of adoption varied with 
different peoples. Among oriental nations it was 
extended to slaves (as Moses) who thereby gained 
their freedom, but in Greece and Rome it was, 
with rare exceptions, limited to citizens. 

In Greece a man might during his lifetime, or by 
will, to take effect after his death, adopt any male 

citizen into the privileges of his son, 

2. Greek but with the invariable condition that 

the adopted son accepted the legal 
obligations and reUgious duties of a real son. 

In Rome the unique nature of paternal authority 
(pairia potestas), by which a son was held in his 

father's power, almost as a slave was 

3. Roman owned by his master, gave a pecuHar 

character to the process of adoption. 
For the adoption of a person free from paternal 
authority (sui juris), the process and effect were 
practically the same in Rome as in Greece {adro- 
gatio). In a more specific sense, adoption proper 
{adoptio) was the process by which a person was 
transferred from his natural father's power into 
that of his adoptive father, and it consisted in a 
fictitious sale of the son, and his surrender by the 
natural to the adoptive father. 

//. Paul's Doctrine. — As a Rom citizen the 
apostle would naturally know of the Rom custom, 
but in the cosmopohtan city of Tarsus, and again 
on his travels, he would become equally familiar 
with the corresponding customs of other nations. 
He employed the idea metaphorically much in the 
manner of Christ's parables, and, as in their case, 
there is danger of pressing the analogy too far in 
its details. It is not clear that he had any specific 
form of adoption in mind when illustrating his 
teaching by the general idea. Under this figure 
he teaches that God, by the manifestation of His 
grace in Christ, brings men into the relation of sons 
to Himself, and communicates to them the experi- 
ence of sonship. 

In Gal Paul emphasizes especially the liberty 
enjoyed by those who live by faith, in contrast 
to the bondage under which men are held, who 
guide their hves by legal ceremonies and ordi- 
nances, as the Galatians were prone to do (5 1). 




The contrast between law and faith is first set 
forth on the field of history, as a contrast between 
both the pre-Christian and the Chris- 
1. In Gal tian economies (3 23.24), although in 
as Liberty another passage he carries the idea of 
adoption back into the covenant rela- 
tion of God with Israel (Rom 9 4). But here 
the historical antithesis is reproduced in the con- 
trast between men who now choose to live under 
law and those who live by fa'ith. Three figures 
seem to commingle in the description of man's 
condition under legal bondage — that of a slave, 
that of a minor under guardians appointed by his 
father's will, and that of a Rom son under the 
patria potestas (Gal 4 1-3). The process of lib- 
eration is first of all one of redemption or buying 
out (Gr exagordsei) (4 5). This term in itself 
applies equally well to the slave who is redeemed 
from bondage, and the Rom son whose adoptive 
father buys him out of the authority of his natural 
father. But in the latter case the condition of the 
son is not materially altered by the process: he 
only exchanges one paternal authority for another. 
If Paul for a moment thought of the process in 
terms of ordinary Rom adoption, the resulting 
condition of the son he conceives in terms of the 
more free and gracious Greek or Jewish family life. 
Or he may have thought of the rarer case of adop- 
tion from conditions of slavery into the status of 
sonship. The redemption is only a precondition 
of adoption, which follows upon faith, and is 
accompanied by the sending of "the Spirit of his 
Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father," and 
then all bondage is done away (4 5-7). 

In Rom (8 12-17) the idea of obligation or debt 
is coupled with that of liberty. Man is thought 
of as at one time under the authority 
2. In Rom and power of the flesh (8 5), but when 
as Deliver- the Spirit of Christ comes to dwell 
ance from in him, he is no longer a debtor to the 
Debt flesh but to the Spirit (8 12.13), and 

debt or obligation to the Spirit is 
itself liberty. As in Gal, man thus passes from a 
state of bondage into a state of sonship which is 
also a state of liberty. "For as many as are led 
by the Spirit of God, these [and these only] are 
sons of God" (8 14). The spirit of adoption or 
sonship stands in diametrical opposition to the 
spirit of bondage (8 15). And the Spirit to which 
we are debtors and by which we are led, at once 
awakens and confirms the experience of sonship 
within us (8 16). In both places, Paul conveys 
under this figure, the idea of man as passing from a 
state of alienation from God and of bondage under 
law and sin, into that relation with God of mutual 
confidence and love, of unity of thought and will, 
which should characterize the ideal family, and in 
which all restraint, compulsion and fear have passed 

///. The Christian Experience.— Aa a fact of 
Christian experience, the adoption is the recognition 
and affirmation by man of his sonship toward God. 
It follows upon faith in Christ, by which man be- 
comes so united with Christ that his filial spirit 
enters into him, and takes possession of his con- 
sciousness, so that he knows and greets God as 
Christ does (cf Mk 14 36). ' 

It is an aspect of the same experience that Paul 
describes elsewhere, under another legal metaphor, 
as justification by faith. Accordmg 
1. In Rela- to the latter, God declares the sinner 
tion to Jus- righteous and treats him as such, 
tification admits him to the experience of for- 
giveness, reconciliation and peace 
(Rom 6 1). In aU this the relation of father and 
son is undoubtedly involved, but in adoption it is 
emphatically expressed. It is not only that the 

prodigal son is welcomed home, glad to confess 
that he is not worthy to be called a son, and willing 
to be made as one of the hired servants, but he is 
embraced and restored to be a son as before. The 
point of each metaphor is, that justification is the 
act of a merciful judge setting the prisoner free, 
but adoption is the act of a generous father, taking 
a son to his bosom and endowing him with liberty, 
favor and a heritage. 

Besides, justification is the beginning of a proc- 
ess which needs for its completion a progressive 
course of sanctification by the aid of 

2. In Rela- the Holy Spirit, but adoption is 
tion to Sane- coextensive with sanctification. The 
tification sons of God are those led by the 

Spirit of God (Rom 8 14); and the 
same spirit of God gives the experience of sonship. 
Sanctification describes the process of general cleans- 
ing and growth as an abstract process, but adoption 
includes it as a concrete relation to God, as loyalty, 
obedience, and fellowship with an ever-loving 

Some have identified adoption with regeneration, 

and therefore many Fathers and Roman Catholic 

theologians have identified it with 

3. In Rela- baptismal regeneration, thereby ex- 
tion to eluding the essential fact of con- 
Regenera- scions sonship. The new birth and 
tion adoption are certainly aspects of the 

same totaUty of experience, but they 
belong to different systems of thought, and to 
identify them is to invite confusion. The new 
birth defines especially the origin and moral quality 
of the Christian experience as an abstract fact, 
but adoption expresses a concrete relation of man 
to God. Nor does Paul here raise the question of 
man's natural and original condition. It is pressing 
the analogy too far to infer from this doctrine of 
adoption that man is by nature not God's son. 
It would contradict Paul's teaching elsewhere 
(e.g. Acts 17 28), and he should not be convicted 
of inconsistency on the application of a metaphor. 
He conceives man outside Christ as morally an 
aHen and a stranger from God, and the change 
wrought by faith in Christ makes him morally a 
son and conscious of his sonship; but naturally he 
is always a potential son because God is always a 
real father. 

/v. As God's Act. — Adoption as God's act is an 
eternal process of His gracious love, for He "fore- 
ordained us unto adoption as sons through Jesus 
Christ unto himself, according to the good pleasure 
of his will" (Eph 15). 

The motive and impulse of Fatherhood which 

result in adoption were eternally real and active 

in God. In some sense He had be- 

1. Divine stowed the adoption upon Israel 
Fatherhood (Rom 9 4). "Israel is my son, my 

first-born" (Ex 4 22; cf Dt 14 1; 32 
6; Jer 31 9; Hos 11 1). God could not reveal 
Himself at all without revealing something of His 
Fatherhood, but the whole revelation was as yet 
partial and prophetic. When "God sent forth his 
Son" to "redeem them that were under the law," 
it became possible for men to receive the adoption; 
for to those who are willing to receive it, He sent 
the Spirit of the eternal Son to testify in their hearts 
that they are sons of God, and to give them, con- 
fidence and utterance to enable them to call God 
their Father (Gal 4 5.6; Rom 8 15). 

But this experience also is incomplete, and looks 

forward to a fuller adoption in the response, not 

only of man's spirit, but of the whole 

2. Its Cos- creation, including man's body, to 
mic Range the Fatherhood of God (Rom 8 23). 

Every fihal spirit now groans, because 
it finds itself imprisoned in a body subjected to 



vanity, but it awaits a redemption of the body, 
perhaps in the resurrection, or in some final con- 
summation, when the whole material creation 
shall be transformed into a fitting environment 
for the sons of God, the creation itself delivered 
from the bondage of corruption into the liberty of 
the glory of the children of God (Rom 8 21). 
Then will adoption be complete, when man's whole 
personality shall be in harmony with the spirit of 
sonship, and the whole universe favorable to its 
perseverance in a state of blessedness. See Chil- 
dren OF God. 

Literature. — Lightfoot, Galaiians; Sanday, Romans; 
Lidgett, Fatherhood of God; Ritschl, Justification and 

T Rees 
ADOR, a' dor, ADORA, a-do'ra ('ASupii, Adord): 
In Idumaea, mentioned in Ant, XllI, ix, 1 as one 
of the cities captured by Hyroanus, and referred 
to in 1 Mace 13 20. See Adoraim. 

ADORAIM, ad-o-ra'im (D'^nilijl , 'Mhorayim, 
"a pair of knolls," perhaps): One of several cities 
in Judah that were fortified by Rehoboam (2 Ch 
11 9). The name appears in Jos and in 1 Maco as 
Adora or Dora or Dor. Its location is indicated in 
general by that of the other cities which the record 
in Ch groups with it. Common consent identifies 
it with Ddra, about five miles W. by S. of Hebron. 

ADORAM, a-do'ram. See Adoniram. 

ADORATION, ad-o-ra'shun: Though this word 
never occurs in EV, it represents aspects of worship 
which are very prominent in the Bible. 

/. Etymology. — The word is derived from Lat 
adorare = (l) "to speak to," (2) "to beseech," "en- 
treat," (3) "to do homage," "to worship"; from os 
(oris), mouth. Some have supposed that the root os 
points to the Rom practice of applying the hand to 
the mouth, i.e. kissing the hand to (a person or 
thing), as a token of homage. 

//. Meaning. — Adoration is intense admiration 
culminating in reverence and worship, together 
with the outward acts and attitudes which accom- 
pany such reverence. It thus includes both the 
subjective sentiments, or feelings of the soul, in 
the presence of some superior object or person, 
and the appropriate physical expressions of such 
sentiments in outward acts of homage or of wor- 
ship. In its widest sense it includes reverence 
to beings other than God, esp. to monarchs, who 
in oriental countries were regarded with feelings 
of awe. But it finds its highest expression in 
religion. Adoration is perhaps the highest type 
of worship, involving the reverent and rapt con- 
templation of the Divine perfections and preroga- 
tives, the acknowledgment of them in words ' of 
praise, together with the visible symbols and 
postures that express the adoring attitude of the 
creature in the presence of his Creator. It is the ex- 
pression of the soul's mystical realization of God's 
presence in His transcendent greatness, holiness 
and lovingkindness. As a form of prayer, adoration 
is to be distinguished from other forms, such as 
petition, thanksgiving, confession and intercession. 

///. Outward Postures.— In the OT and NT, 
these are similar to those which prevailed in all 
oriental countries, as amply illustrated by the 
monuments of Egypt and Assyria, and by the 
customs still in use among the nations of the East. 
The chief attitudes referred to in the Bible are the 

Among the Orientals, esp. Persians, prostration 
(i.e. falling upon the knees, then gradually inclining 
the body, until the forehead touched the ground) 
was common as an expression of profound rev- 
erence and humility before a superior or a bene- 

factor. It was practised in the worship of Yah- 

weh (Gen 17 3; Nu 16 45; Mt 26 39, Jesus in 

Gethsemane; Rev 1 17), and of idols 

1. Prostra- (2 K 5 18; Dnl 3 5.6), but was by 
tion no means confined to religious exer- 
cises. It was the formal method of 

supplicating or doing obeisance to a superior (e.g. 

1 S 25 23f; 2 K 4 37; Est 8 3; Mk 6 22; Jn 
11 32). 

A substitute for prostration was kneeling, a 

common attitude in worship, frequently mentioned 

in OT and NT (e.g. 1 K 8 54; Ezr 

2. Kneeling 9 5; Ps 95 6; Isa 45 23; Lk 22 41, 

Christ in Gethsemane; Acts 7 60; 
Eph 3 14). The same attitude was sometimes 
adopted in paying homage to a fellow-creature, as 
in 2 K 1 13. "Sitting" as an attitude of prayer 
(only 2 S 7 18 II 1 Ch 17 16) was probably a form 
of kneeling, as in Mahometan worship. 

This was the most usual posture in prayer, like 
that of modern Jews in pubhc worship. Abraham 

"stood before Jeh" when he interceded 

3. Standing for Sodom (Gen 18 22). Cf 1 S 1 26. 

The Pharisee in the parable "stood and 
prayed" (Lk 18 11), and the hypocrites are said to 
"pray standing in the synagogues, and in the corners 
of the streets" (Mt 6 5 AV). 

The above postures were accompanied by various 
attitudes of the hands, which were either lifted 

up toward heaven (Ps 63 4; 1 'Tim 

4. The 2 8), or outspread (Ex 9 29; Ezr 9 5; 
Hands Isa 1 15), or both (1 K 8 54). 

The heathen practice of kissing hands 
to the heavenly bodies as a sign of adoration is re- 
ferred to in Job 31 27, and of kissing the idol in 
1 K 19 18; Hos 13 2. The kiss of 

5. Kiss of homage is mentioned in Ps 2 12, if the 
Adoration text there be correct. Kissing hands 

to the object of adoration was custom- 
ary among the Romans (Pliny xxviii.5). The NT 
word for "worship" (proshuned) lit. means to kiss the 
hand to (one) . See also Attitudes. 

IV. Objects of Adoration. — The only adequate 
object of adoration is the Supreme Being. He 
only who is the sum of all perfections can fully 
satisfy man's instincts of reverence, and elicit the 
complete homage of his soul. 

Yet, as already suggested, the crude beginnings 

of religious adoration are to be found in the respect 

paid to created beings regarded as 

1. Fellow- possessing superior claims and powers. 
Creatures esp. to kings and rulers. As instances 

we may mention the woman of Tekoa 
falling on her face to do obeisance to King David 
(2 S 14 4), and the king's servants bowing down 
to do reverence to Haman (Est 3 2). Cf Ruth 

2 10; IS 20 41; 2 S 1 2; 14 22. 

On a higher plane, as involving some recognition 
of divinity, is the homage paid to august and mys- 
terious objects in Nature, or to 

2. Material phenomena in the physical world 
Objects which were supposed to have some 

divine significance. To give rever- 
ence to material objects themselves is condemned 
as idolatry throughout the OT. Such e.g. is the 
case with the worship of "the host of heaven" (the 
heavenly bodies) sometimes practised by the 
Hebrews (2 K 17 16; 21 3.5). So Job protests 
that he never proved false to God by kissing hands 
to the sun and moon in token of adoration (Job 31 
26-28). We have reference in the OT to acts of 
homage paid to an idol or an image, such as falling 
down before it (Isa 44 15.17.19; Dnl 3 7), or 
kissing it (1 K 19 18; Hos 13 2). All such prac- 
tices are condemned in uncompromising terms. 
But when material things produce a reverential 
attitude, not to themselves, but to the Deity whose 



presence they symbolize, then they are regarded 
as legitimate aids to devotion; e.g. fire as a 
manifestation of the Divine presence is described 
as causing the spectator to perform acts of 
reverence (e.g. Ex 3 2.5; Lev 9 24; IK 18 38 f). 
. In these instances, it was Yahweh Himself that 
was worshipped, not the fire which reveajed Him. 
The sacred writers are moved to religious adora- 
tion by the contemplation of the glories of Nature. 
To them, "the heavens declare the glory of God; 
and the firmament sheweth his handiwork." (Cf 
esp. the "nature-Pss" 8, 19, 29, 104.) 

On a still higher plane is the adoration prac- 
tised in the presence of supernatural agents of the 
Divine will. When an angel of God 

3. Angels appeared, men fell instinctively before 

him in reverence and awe (e.g. Gen 18 
2; 19 1; Nu 22 31; Jgs 13 20; Lk 24 4.5). 
This was not to worship the creature instead of the 
Creator, for the angel was regarded, not as a dis- 
tinct individual having an existence and character 
of his own, but as a theophany, a self-manifestation 
of God. 

The highest form of adoration is that which is 

directed immediately to God Himself, His kingly 

attributes and spiritual excellencies 

4. The being so apprehended by the soul 
Deity that it is filled with rapture and praise, 

and is moved to do Him reverence. 
A classical instance is the vision that initiated 
Isaiah into the prophetic office, when he was so 
possessed with the sovereignty and subHmity of 
God that he was filled with wonder and self-abase- 
ment (Isa 6 1-5). In the OT, the literature of 
adoration reaches its high-water mark in the Pss 
(cf esp. the group Pss 95-100), where the ineffable 
majesty, power and holiness of God are set forth 
in lofty strains. In the NT, adoration of the Deity 
finds its most rapturous expression in Rev, where 
the vision of God calls forth a chorus of praise 
addressed to the thrice-holy God (4 8-11; 7 11.12), 
with whom is associated the Redeemer-Lamb. 

How far is Jesus regarded in the NT as an object 
of adoration, seeing that adoration is befitting only 

to God? During Our Lord's lifetime 
B. Jesus He was often the object of worship 
Christ (Mt 2 11; 8 2; 9 18; 14 33; 15 

25; 20 20; 28 9.17; Mk 6 6; Jn 
9 38). Some ambiguity, however, belongs to the 
Gr word proskunein, for while it is the usual word 
for "worshipping" God (e.g. Jn 4 24), in some 
contexts it means no more than paying homage to 
a person of superior rank by kneeling or prostra- 
tion, just as the unmerciful servant is said to have 
'fallen down and worshipped' his master the king 
(Mt 18 26), and as Jos speaks of the Jewish high 
priests as proskunoiimenoi (BJ, IV, v, 2). On the 
other hand, it certainly implies a consciousness, on 
the part of those who paid this respect to Jesus, and 
of Jesus Himself, of a very exceptional superiority 
in His person, for the same homage was refused 
by Peter, when offered to him by CorneUus, on the 
ground that he himself also was a man (Acts 10 25 
f), and even by the angel before whom John pros- 
trated himself, on the ground that God alone was 
to be "worshipped" (Rev 22 8.9). Yet Jesus never 
repudiated such tokens of respect. But whatever 
about the "days of His flesh," there is no doubt 
that after the ascension Christ became to the church 
the object of adoration as Divine, and the homage 
paid to Him was indistinguishable in character 
from that paid to God. This is proved not only 
by isolated passages, but still more by the whole 
tone of the Acts and epp. in relation to Him. This 
adoration reaches its highest expression in Rev 5 
9-14, where the Redeemer-Lamb who shares the 
throne of God is the subject of an outburst of 


adoring praise on the part of the angelic hosts. 
In 4 8-11 the hymn of adoration is addressed to 
the Lord God Almighty, the Creator; here it is 
addressed to the Lamb on the ground of His re- 
deeming work. In Rev the adoration of Him "who 
sitteth on the throne" and that of "the Lamb" 
flow together into one stream of ecstatic praise 
(cf 7 9-11). D. MiALL Edwards 

ADORN, a-dorn' (koo-iji^w, kosmSo): Has as its 
primary meaning "to arrange," "to put in order," 
'to decorate." It is used with reference to the 
manner in which Christian women were urged to 
dress. This was a vital question in the early 
church, and both Paul and Peter give advice on the 
subject (1 Tim 2 9; 1 Pet 3 3). See Dbess. 

Figurative: In Mt 12 44 AV the word is tr^ 
"garnish" and is used in a fig. sense. It describes 
accurately the condition of the Jewish nation. Even 
though they have swept out idolatry and have 
adorned the life with much ceremony and endless 
rehgious prescriptions yet the evil spirit can say, "I 
will return to my house." This same thing has re- 
peatedly been done by individuals and nations when 
reforms have been instituted, but Christ was not en- 
throned and the heart or nation was still dominated 
by evil. It is used also in a fig. sense with reference 
to the graces of the Christian life. When we re- 
member how very highly Orientals esteem the adorn- 
ment of the body, its use here becomes very forceful. 
It is this that makes Ps 45 13 of special significance 
as to the beauty and glory of the church as she is 
presented to God. See also Prov 19; 4 9; Isa 
61 10; 1 Pet 3 4.5. Consecration to God, the in- 
dwelling of His Spirit, righteousness, a meek and 
quiet spirit — these are the true adornments of the 
life. All these passages carry with them the idea of 
joy, the satisfaction that should be ours in these 
possessions. Jacob W. Kapp 

ADRA, a'dra. See Arad (city). 

.ADRAMMELECH, a-dram'el-ek, and ANAM- 
MELECH, a-nam'el-ek (TfbB'l-JSI! and ^I^psy, 
'adhrammelekh and 'dnammelekh, apparently, ac- 
cording to Assyrian usage, "Adar is prince," Ann 
is prince." By Palestinian usage it would be 
"Adar is king," "Anu is king"): 

(1) The names given by the Israehtish narrator 
to the god or gods imported into the Samaritan 
land by the men of Sepharvaim whom the king 
of Assyria had settled there (2 K 17 31). In the 
Bab pantheon Anu, the god of heaven, is one of the 
three chief gods, and Adar, otherwise known as 
Ninib, is a solar god. Concerning the statements 
in this ver in K, archaeologists differ in some im- 
portant points, and it is a case in which a sus- 
pended judgment may be becoming in one who is 
not an expert. But at least a portion of the alleged 
difficulties have arisen from failures to get the point 
of view of the Israelitish narrator. He is writing 
from a time considerably later than the estab- 
lishment of the institutions of which he speaks — 
late enough to render the phrase "unto this day" 
suitable (2 K 17 34), late enough so that words 
and usages may have undergone modification. 
He is describing a mixture of religions which he 
evidently regards as deserving of contempt and 
ridicule, even apart from the falsity of the religions 
included in it. This mixture he describes as con- 
taining ingredients of three kinds — ^first, the im- 
ported religions of the imported peoples; second, 
the local high-place religions (vs 32, etc), and third, 
the Jeh religion of Northern Israel (not that of 
Jerus). It is not likely that he thought that they 
practised any cult in its purity. They contami- 
nated the religion of Jeh by introducing Canaanitish 




usages into it, and they are likely to have done the 
same with the ancestral religions which they brought 
with them. The proper names may be correct as 
representing Pal usage, even if they differ some- 
what from the proper Bab usage. The writer says 
that they "burnt their children in the fire to Adram- 
meleoh," but this does not necessarily prove that 
he thought that they brought this practice from 
Babylonia; his idea may be that they corrupted 
even their own false cult by introducing into it 
this horrible Canaanitish rite. In considering the 
bearings of the evidence of the monuments on the 
case, considerations of this kind should not be 

(2) The name of a son of Sennacherib king of 
Assyria — one of the two who slew him and escaped, 
indirectly leading to the accession of Esar-haddon 
(2 K 19 37; Isa 37 38). Mention of the inci- 
dent is found on the monuments, and traces of the 
name appear in the writings of Abydenus and Poly- 
histor. Willis J. Beecher 

ADRAMYTTIUM, ad-ra-mit'i-um ('ASpaiiirTiov, 
AdrarmXltion; for other forms see Thayer's lexicon) : 
An ancient city of Mysia in the Rom Province of 
Asia. The only reference in the NT to it is in Acts 
27 2 which says that Paul, while being taken a pris- 
oner from Caesarea to Rome, embarked upon a ship 
belonging to A. 

The city, with a good harbor, stood at the head of 
the Gulf of Adramyttium facing the island of Les- 
bos, and at the base of Mt. Ida. Its early history 
is obscure. While some authors fancy that it was 
the Pedasus of Homer, others suppose that it was 
founded by Adramys, the brother of the wealthy 
Croesus; probably a small Athenian colony existed 
there long before the time of Adramys. When 
Pergamus became the capital of Asia, A. grew to be 
a city of considerable importance, and the metropolis 
of the N.W. part of the province. There the assizes 
were held. The coins which the peasants pick up 
in the surrounding fields, and which are frequently 
aids in determining the location and history of the 
cities of Asia Minor, were struck at A. as late as the 
3d cent. AD, and sometimes in connection with 
Ephesus. Upon them the effigies of Castor and 
Pollux appear, showing that A. was the seat of 
worship of these deities. 

The ancient city with its harbor has entirely 
disappeared, but on a hill, somewhat farther inland, 
is a village of about one thousand houses bearing 
the name Edremid, a corruption of the ancient 
name Adramys. The miserable wooden huts 
occupied by Gr fishermen and by Turks are sur- 
rounded by vineyards and olive trees, hence the 
chief trade is in olive oil, raisins and timber. In 
ancient times A. was noted for a special ointment 
which was prepared there (Pliny, NH, xiii.2.5). 

E. J. Banks 

ADRIA, a'dri-a (6 'ASptas, [WH] ho Hadrias or 
ho Adrlas): In Gr Adrias (Polybios i.2.4), Adriatike 
Thalassa (Strabo iv.204), and Adriatikon Pelagos 
(Ptolemy iii.15.2), and in Lat Adriaticum mare 
(Livy xl.57.7), Adrianum mare (Cicero in Pisonem 
38), Adrialicus sinus (Livy x.2.4), and Mare 
superum (Cicero ad Alt. 9.5.1). The Adriatic 
Sea is a name derived from the old Etruscan city 
Atria, situated near the mouth of the Po (Livy v. 
33.7; Strabo v.214). At first the name Adria 
was only applied to the most northern part of the 
sea. But after the development of the Syracusan 
colonies on the Italian and lUyrian coasts the 
application of the term was gradually extended 
southward, so as to reach Moms Garganus (the 
Abruzzi), and later the Strait of Hydruntum 
(Ptolemy iii. 1 . 1 ; Polybios vii. 19.2) . But finally the 
name embraced the Ionian Sea as well, and we 

find it employed to denote the Gulf of Tarentum 
(Servius Aen xi.540), the SiciUan Sea (Pausanias v. 
25), and even the waters between Crete and Malta 
(Orosius i.2.90). Procopius considers Malta as 
lying at the western extremity of the Adriatic Sea 
(i.l4). After leaving Crete the vessel in which 
the apostle Paul was sailing under military escort 
was "driven to and fro in the sea of Adria" four- 
teen days (Acts 27 27) before it approached the 
shore of Malta. We may compare this with the 
shipwreck of Jos in "the middle of the Adria" where 
he was picked up by a ship sailing from Cjrrene to 
Puteoli (Jos, Vita, 3). George H. Allen 

ADRIEL, a'dri-el (bsi")-?, 'adhri'el, "my 
help is God"): The son of Barzillai the Meholath- 
ite, to whom Merab the daughter of King Saul was 
married when she should have been given to David 
(1 S 18 19; 2 S 21 8). "Michal" in 21 8 is a 
textual error easily accounted for. Adriel and Merab 
had five sons, whom David handed over to the blood 
vengeance of the men of Gibeon. The name Adriel 
seems to be Aram., the equivalent of the Heb name 

ADUEL, a-du'el ('ASou^X, Adouel): An ancestor 
of Tobit (Tob 1 1). 

ADULLAM, a-dul'am (Dii"jy , 'Mhullam) : 

(1) A city, with dependencies, and anciently 
having a king, mentioned five times in the OT, 
each time in a list with other cities (Josh 12 15; 15 
35; 2 Ch 11 7; Mic 1 15; Neh 11 30). In the 
list of 31 kings whom Joshua smote, AduUam 
follows Hormah, Arad, Libnah, and precedes Mak- 
kedah. Among the 14 Judahite cities of the first 
group in "the lowland" AduUam is mentioned be- 
tween Jarmuth and Socoh. In the fist of 15 cities 
fortified by Rehoboam it appears between Socoh and 
Gath. Micah gives what may be a Ust of cities 
concerned in some Assyr approach to Jerus; it 
begins with Gath, includes Lachish, and ends with 
Mareshah and AduUam. And AduUam is still 
in the same company in the hst in Neh of the cities 
"and their villages" where the men of Judah then 
dwelt. In the time of the patriarchs it was a place 
to which men "went down" from the central moun- 
tain ridge (Gen 38 1). Judas Maccabaeus found 
it still existing as a city (2 Mace 12 38). Common 
opinion identifies AduUam with the ruin ''Aid-el-Ma, 
13 miles W.S.W. from Bethlehem (see HOHL, 
229 ff). This is in spite of the testimony of the 
Onom, which, it is alleged, confuses AduUam with 
Eglon. Presumably the city gave its name to the 
cave of AduUam, the cave being near the city. 

(2) The cave of AduUam, David's headquarters 
during a part of the time when he was a fugitive 
from Saul (1 S 22 1; 2 S 23 13; 1 Ch 11 15). 
Sufficient care has not been exercised in reading the 
Bible statements on this subject. To begin with, 
Heb syntax permits of the use of the word "cave" 
collectively; it may denote a group or a region of 
caves; it is not shut up to the meaning that there 
was one immense cave in which David and his 400 
men all found accommodations at once. All reason- 
ings based on this notion are futile. 

Further, by the most natural syntax of 2 S 23 
13-17 (duplicated with unimportant variations in 
1 Ch 11 15-19), that passage describes two dif- 
ferent events, and does not connect the cave of 
AduUam with the second of these. "And three of 
the thirty chief men went down, and came to David 
in the harvest time unto the cave of AduUam ; and 
the troop of the Philistines was encamped in the 
valley of Rephaim. And David was then in the 
stronghold; and the garrison of the Phihstines was 
then in Beth-lehem. And David longed, and said, 




Oh that one would give me water," etc. Concerning 
these three seniors among David's "mighty men" it 
is narrated, first, that they were David's comrades 
in a certain battle, a battle which the Chronicler 
identifies with Pas-dammim, where David slew 
Gohath; second, that they joined David at the 
cave of Adullam, presumably during the time when 
he was in hiding from Saul; third, that at a later 
time, when the Philistines were in the valley of 
Rephaim (cf 2 S 6 18), and David was "in the 
stronghold" (Jos says "at Jerusalem," Anl, VII, 
xii, 4), these men broke through the PhiU Unes and 
brought him water from the home well of Bethlehem. 

The cave of Adullam, like the city, was "down" 
from the central ridge (1 S 22 1; 2 S 23 13). 
The city was in Judah; and David and his men were 
in Judah (1 S 23 3) at a time when, apparently, 
the cave was their headquarters. Gad's advice to 
David to return to Judah (1 S 22 3.5) was given 
at a time when he had left the cave of Adullam. 
If the current identification of 'Aid-el-Ma. as Adul- 
lam is correct, the cave of Adullam is probably the 
cave region which has been found in that vicinity. 

It has been objected that this location is too far 
from Bethlehem for David's men to have brought 
the water from there. To this it is rephed that 
thirteen or fourteen miles is not an excessive dis- 
tance for three exceptionally vigorous men to go and 
return; and a yet stronger reply is found in the 
consideration just mentioned, that the place from 
which the men went for the water was not the cave 
of Adullam. The one argument for the tradition 
to the effect that St. Chariton's cave, a few miles 
S.E. of Bethlehem, is Adullam, is the larger size of 
this cave, as compared with those near ^Aid-el^Ma 
We have already seen that this has no force. 

In oiir current speech "cave of Adullam" sug- 
gests an aggregation of ill-assorted and disreputable 
men. This is not justified by the Bible record. 
David's men included his numerous and respectable 
kinsmen, and the representative of the priesthood, 
and some of David's mifitary companions, and some 
men who afterward held high office in Israel. Even 
those who are described as being in distress and 
debt and bitter of soul were doubtless, many of 
them, persons who had suffered at the hands of 
Saul on account of their friendship for David. 
Doubtless they included mere adventurers in their 
number; but the Scriptural details and the circum- 
stances alike indicate that they were mainly homo- 
geneous, and that most of them were worthy citizens. 
Willis J. Beecheb 

ADULLAMITE, a-dul'am-it: The gentiUc adj. 
of Adullam, which see. It is used only of Judah's 
friend Hirah (Gen 38 1.12.20). 

ADULTERY, a-dul'ter-i: In Scripture desig- 
nates sexual intercourse of a man, whether married 
or unmarried, with a married woman. 
1. Its It is categorically prohibited in the 

Punishment Decalogue (seventh commandment. 
Ex 20 14; Dt 5 18): "Thou shalt 
not commit adultery." In more specific language 
we read: "And thou shalt not lie carnally with 
thy neighbor's wife, to defile thyself with her" 
(Lev 18 20). The penalty is death for both guilty 
parties: "And the man that committeth adultery 
with another man's wife, even he that committeth 
adultery with his neighbor's wife, the adulterer 
and the adulteress shall surely be put to death 
(Lev 20 10). The manner of death is not par- 
ticularized; according to the rabbis {Siphra' ad 
loc; Sanhedhnn 526) it is strangulation. It would 
seem that in the days of Jesus the manner of death 
was interpreted to mean stoning ("Now in the 
law Moses commanded us to stone such," Jn 8 5, 
said of the woman taken in adultery). Neverthe- 

less, it may be said that in the case in question 
the woman may have been a virgin betrothed unto 
a husband, the law (in Dt 22 23 f ) providing that 
such a person together with her paramour be stoned 
to death (contrast ver 22, where a woman married 
to a husband is spoken of and the manner of death 
is again left general). Ezk 16 40(cf23 47) equally 
mentions stoning as the penalty of the adulteress; 
but it couples to her sin also that of shedding blood; 
hence the rabbinic interpretation is not necessarily 
controverted by the prophet. Of course it may 
also be assumed that a difference of custom may 
have obtained at different times and that the 

Erogress was in the Une of leniency, strangulation 
eing regarded as a more humane form of execu- 
tion than stoning. 

The guilty persons become amenable to the 

death penalty only when taken "in the very act" 

(Jn 8 4). The difficulty of obtaining 

2. Trial by direct legal evidence is adverted to by 
Ordeal the rabbis (see Makkoth 7o). In the 

case of a mere suspicion on the part 
of the husband, not substantiated by legal evidence, 
the woman is compelled by the law (Nu 5 11-30) 
to submit to an ordeal, or God's judgment, which 
consists in her drinking the water of bitterness, 
that is, water from the holy basin mingled with 
dust from the floor of the sanctuary and with the 
washed-off ink of a writing containing the oath 
which the woman has been made to repeat. The 
water is named bitter with reference to its effects 
in the case of the woman's guilt; on the other hand, 
when no ill effects follow, the woman is proved 
innocent and the husband's jealousy unsubstan- 
tiated. According to the Mish (Sotah 9) this ordeal 
of the woman suspected of adultery was abolished 
by Johanan ben Zaccai (after 70 AD), on the ground 
that the men of his generation were not above the 
suspicion of impurity. See article Bitter, Bit- 

Adultery was regarded as a heinous crime (Job 
31 11). 'The prophets and teachers in Israel re- 
peatedly upbraid the men and women 

3. A Hei- of their generations for their loose- 
nous Crime ness in morals which did not shrink 

from adulterous connections. Nat- 
urally where luxurious habits of fife were indulged 
in, particularly in the large cities, a tone of levity 
set in: in the dark of the evening, men, with their 
features masked, waited at their neighbors' doors 
(Job 24 15; 31 9; cf Prov 7), and women for- 
getful of their God's covenant broke faith with the 
husbands of their youth (Prov 2 17). The prophet 
Nathan confronted David after his sin with Bath- 
sheba, the wife of Uriah, with his stern rebuke 
("Thou art the man," 2 S 12 7); the penitential 
psalm (51) —"Miserere"— was sung by the royal 
bard as a prayer for divine pardon. Promiscuous 
intercourse with theu' neighbors' wives is laid by 
Jeremiah at the door of the false prophets of his 
day (Jer 23 10.14; 29 23). 

While penal law takes only cognizance of adul- 
terous relations, it is needless to say that the moral 
law discountenances all manner of 

4. Penal iUicit intercourse and all manner of 
and Moral unchastity in man and woman. While 
Distinctions the phrases "harlotry," "commit har- 
lotry," in Scripture denote the breach 

of wedlock (on the part of a woman), in the rabbinic 
writings a clear distinction is made on the legal 
side between adultery and fornication. The latter 
is condemned morally in no uncertain terms; the 
seventh commandment is made to include all 
manner of fornication. The eye and the heart are 
the two intermediaries of sin (Palestinian Talm, 
B'rakhoih 66). A sinful thought is as wicked as a 
sinful act (Niddah 136 and elsewhere). Job makes 




a covenant with his eyes lest he look upon a virgin 
(31 1). And so Jesus who came "not to destroy, 
but to fulfil" (Mt 5 17), in full agreement with the 
ethical and rehgious teaching of Judaism, makes 
the intent of the seventh commandment exphcit 
when he declares that "every one that looketh on a 
woman to lust after her hath committed adultery 
with her already in his heart" (Mt 5 28). And 
in the spirit of Hosea (4 15) and Johanan ben 
Zaccai (see above) Jesus has but scorn for those 
that are ready judicially to condemn though they 
be themselves not free from sin! "He that is 
without sin among you, let him first cast a stone 
at her" (Jn 8 7). Whereas society is in need of 
the death penalty to secure the inviolability of the 
home fife, Jesus bids the erring woman go her way 
and sin no more. How readily His word might be 
taken by the unspiritual to imply the condoning of 
woman's peccability is evidenced by the fact that 
the whole section (Jn 7 53 — 8 11) is omitted by "most 
ancient authorities" (see St. Augustine's remark). 

Adultery as a ground of divorce. — The meaning 
of the expression "some unseemly thing" (Dt 24 1) 

being unclear, there was great variety 
6. A of opinion among the rabbis as to the 

Ground of grounds upon which a husband may 
Divorce divorce his wife. While the school of 

Hillel legally at least allowed any 
trivial reason as a ground for divorce, the stricter 
interpretation which limited it to adultery alone 
obtained in the school of Shammai. Jesus coin- 
cided with the stricter view (see Mt 5 32; 19 9, 
and commentaries). From a moral point of view, 
divorce was discountenanced by the rabbis like- 
wise, save of course for that one ground which 
indeed makes the continued relations between hus- 
band and wife a moral impossibihty. See also 
Crimes; Divorce. Max L. Mabgolis 

ADUMMIM, a-dum'im (D'^TS'IS, 'adhummim, 
perhaps "red spots"): "The ascent of Adummim" 
is one of the numerous landmarks mentioned in 
defining the northern border of Judah westward 
from the mouth of the Jordan to Jerusalem, and 
in defining the southern border of Benjamin east- 
ward from Jerusalem to the mouth of the Jordan 
(Josh 15 7; 18 17). It is identified with the 
gorge part of the road from Jericho up to Jerusalem. 

The Inn of the Good Samaritan. 

Its present name is TaWat-ed-Dumm, "ascent 
of blood." "The stone is marked by "curious red 
streaks," a phenomenon which probably accounts 
for both the ancient and the modern names, and for 
other similar names which have been applied to the 
locaUty. It is the scene of our Saviour's story of 
the Good Samaritan, and tradition of course locates 
the inn to which the Sam brought the wounded man 
(see HGHL, 265). Willis J. Beecher 

ADVANTAGE, ad-van' taj (1?0 , ^akhan) : In Job 
35 3 is interpreted in succeeding clause as "profit." 
In Rom 3 1 Tepi<r<r6s, perissos, is likewise inter- 
preted by a paraphrase in the next sentence. RV 
prefers to render pleonekteo by "take advantage," 
where AV has "defraud" (2 Cor 7 2) or "make 
gain of" (2 Cor 12 17; cf 2 Cor 2 11). In Jude 
(ver 16), "advantage" (opMleia) means "profit." 

ADVENT, ad'vent. See Incarnation; Millen- 
nium; Parousia. 

ADVENTURE, ad-ven'tftr: "To risk," "to 
dare," referring always to an undertaking attended 
with some peril (Jgs 9 17: "My father adventured 
his fife"). Cf Dt 28 56. So also Eccl 5 14: 
"Riches perish by evil adventure." Only once in 
NT for dlSwfu, dldomi (Acts 19 31), where Paul's 
friends beg him "not to adventure himself [archaic 
for "venture"] into the theatre." 

ADVERSARY, ad'ver-sa-ri, ad'ver-sft-ri : This 
word (in the sing, or pi.) is used in the OT to render 
different Heb words. In thirty-two cases the word 
corresponds to the noun 12 , gar, or the verb T1S , 
garar. This noun is the ordinary word for "foe" or 
"adversary." In twelve passages the Heb word, of 
which "adversary" is the tr, is JOtl , satan = no\m or 
■jUiC, satora= verb. This stem means "to oppose," 
or "thwart" anyone in his purpose or claims. 

The angel of Jeh was satan to Balaam (Nu 22 22). 
The word often denotes a poUtical adversary 
(1 K 11 14.23.25). In four cases (viz. Prologue to 
Job; Zee 3 1.2; 1 Ch 21 1; Ps 109 6) the AV 
retains Satan as the rendering. But it is only in 
1 Ch that the word is used without the art., that 
is, strictly as a proper name. The LXX gives 
Si(£|8oXos, didbolos, as the rendering, and both in Job 
and Zee, Satan is portrayed as the "false accuser." 
In two cases "adversary" represents two Heb ex- 
pressions which mean the "opponent in a suit" or 
"controversy" (Job 31 35; Isa 60 8). 

In the NT "adversary" represents: (1) avrixet- 
/levoL, antikeimenoi, the participle of a verb which 
means "to be set over against," "to be opposed" 
(Lk 13 17; Phil 1 28). (2) dvrlStms, anlidikos, 
"opponent in a lawsuit," "prosecutor" (Mt 6 
25; Lk 12 58; 18 3; 1 Pet 6 8). According to 
the last passage the devil is the "accuser" or 
"prosecutor" of believers, but according to another 
writer they have an "advocate" or "counselor 
for the defense" with the Father (1 Jn 2 1). In 
one passage (He 10 27) "adversary" represents a 
Gr word, hupenantios, which means "set over 
against," "contrary to" — a word used in classical 
Gr and in the LXX. Thomas Lewis 

ADVERSITY, ad-vlir'si-ti: In RV exclusively 
an OT term, expressing the various forms of distress 
and evil conveyed by four Heb words: 552 , sela\ 
"ahalting"or "fall"; HIS, (arah, "straits'," "dis- 
tress," "affiiction"; 132, gar, "straitness," "afflic- 
tion"; y-\, ra\ "bad," "evil," "harmful." These 
words cover the whole range of misfortunes caused 
by enemies, poverty, sorrow and trouble. "Ad- 
versity," which occurs once in AV in NT (He 13 3: 
KaKovxoiiJ.ems, kakouchoilmenos, "ill-treated") is dis- 
placed in RV by the fit. rendering which illustrates 
or interprets a common phase of adversity. 

DwiGHT M. Pratt 

ADVERTISE, ad'ver-tiz: This word is found 
twice in the OT: In Nu 24 14 (from Heb 'f?;, 
yd'ag, "to advise") Balaam advises Balak of the 
future of Israel and its influence upon his kingdom 
("I will advertise thee"). In AV Ruth 4 4 (from 




■jTit n?3 , galah 'ozen, "to uncover the ear," "to 
reveal") Boaz in speaking to the nearer kinsman 
of Ruth: "I thought to advertise thee" (RVm 
"uncover thine ear"). 

ad-viz', ad-viz'ment: Aside from their regular 
meaning these words are peculiarly employed as 
foUows: (1) Advice: In 2 S 19 43 (from "IS'I, 
ddbhar, "word") the meaning is equal to "request" 
(RVm "were we not the first to speak of bringing 
back"). In 1 S 25 33 AV (from D?y, ta'am, 
"taste," "reason") "advice" is equal to "sagacity" 
(RV "blessed be thy discretion"). In 2 Ch 25 17 
(from 7?^ I yS''at, to give or take counsel") the 
meaning seems to be "to consult with oneself"; 
cf also Jgs 19 30 AV (RV "take counsel"). (2) 
Advise: In 2 S 24 13 AV (from VT,, yadha\ 
"to know") "to advise" means "to advise oneself," 
i.e. "to consider" (RV "advise thee"). Cf also 
1 Ch 21 12 AV (RV "consider" from nST , 
rd'ah, "to see") and Prov 13 10 where "well- 
advised" is the same as "considerate" (from 7?^, 
yd'as; see 2 Ch 26 17). (3) Advisement (anti- 
quated): Found once in the OT in 1 Ch 12 19 
(from nSy, 'egah, "counsel"), where "upon ad- 
visement" means "upon deliberation." Cf 2 Mace 
14 20 AV (RV "when these proposals had been 
long considered"). A. L. Beeslich 

ADVOCATE, ad'vo-kat (irapAKXriTOs, pardkletos) : 
Found in 1 Jn 2 1, "If any man sin, we have an 
Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the right- 
eous." The Gr word has several shades of mean- 
ing: (1) a legal advocate; (2) an intercessor; (3) 
a helper generally. In the passage before us the 
first and second meanings are included. Christ 
in heaven intercedes for Christians who sin upon 
earth. The next ver declares that He is the "pro- 
pitiation for oiu: sins" and it is His propitiatory 
work which lies at the basis of His intercession. 
The margins of RV and ARV give as alternative 
readings Comforter, Helper, Gr Paraclete. Beyond 
doubt however, "advocate" is the correct tr in the 
passage in the ep. The same Gr word also occurs 
in the Gospel of John (14 16.26; .16 26; 16 7) 
referring not to Christ but to the Holy Spirit, to 
whom Christ refers as "another comforter" whom 
He will send from the Father. In the Gospel 
various functions are ascribed to the Spirit in rela- 
tion to behevers and unbelievers. The word in 
the Gospel is inadequately tr^ "Comforter." The 
Spirit according to these passages, is more than 
Comforter and more than Advocate. See Para- 
clete; Comforter; Holy Spirit. 


ADYTUM, ad'i-tum (Lat from Gr aSvrov, 
dduUm, adj. ddutos, "not to be entered"): Applied 
to the innermost sanctuary or chambers in ancient 
temples, and to secret places which were open only 
to priests: hence also to the Holy of Holies in the 
Jewish temple. See Temple. 

AEDIAS, a-l-di'as ('AriSttas, Aedelas): Men- 
tioned in 1 Esd 9 27, being one of those who agreed 
to divorce their aUen wives. This name is sup- 
posed to be a corruption of the Gr 'HXte, Helia, 
there being no Heb equivalent for it, and in Ezr 10 
26, the name occurs in the correct form as Elijah 
(njbS , 'ellydh= "God is Jehovah"). 

AELIA, e'li-a. See Jerdsalbm. 

AENEAS, g-ne'as ('Aiv^os, Ain4as): A para- 
lytic at Lydda, who, after he "had kept his bed eight 
years," was miraculously healed by Peter (Acts 9 

AENON, e'non (Atvdv, Aindn): The place 
where John was baptizing "because there was much 
water there" (Jn 3 23). It was on the west side 
of the Jordan, the place where John baptized at 
the first being on the east (Jn 1 28; 3 26; 10 40). 
We may be sure it was not in Sam territory. Onom 
locates it 8 Rom miles S. of Scythopolis (Beisdn), 
this stretch of land on the west of the Jordan being 
then, not under Samaria, but under Scythopolis. 
Its position is defined by nearness to Salim. Various 
identifications have been suggested, the most prob- 
able being the springs near Umm el-Amdan, 
which exactly suit the position indicated by Onom. 
See discussion under Salim. W. Ewing 

AEON, e'on: This word originally meant "dura- 
tion," "dispensation." In the philosophy of Plato 
and Aristotle the word is aldv, aidn, from which this 
word is transliterated. In the gnostic philosophy 
it has a special meaning and is there used to solve 
the problem of the world order. In the infinite 
separation between God and the world, it was 
taught, there must of necessity be mediating powers. 
These powers are the aeons and are the successive 
emanations from God from eternity. They are 
spiritual, existing as distinct entities. They con- 
stituted the Divine fulness or the Divine Pleroma. 
The name was applied to these beings for two reasons : 
because they were thought to partake of the eternal 
existence of God and because they were supposed 
to govern the various ages. The idea of the aeons 
in various forms may be found in nearly all oriental 
philosophy that attempted to deal with the prob- 
lem of the world order. It appears in the writings 
of Philo, in Shintoism, in the old Zoroastrian religion. 
See Gnosticism. Jacob W. Kapp 

AESORA, e'so-ra, AV Esora, 6-s5'ra (Alo-wpa, 
Aisord): A town in the borders of Samaria, men- 
tioned in connection with Beth-horon and Jericho 
(Jth 4 4), and from this association we judge that 
it was in the eastern part of Samaria. 

AFFECT, AFFECTION, a-fekt', a-fek'shun: 
The ht. meaning of "affect" is to act upon (Lat 
ad, "to," "upon," fado, "to do"). It has various 
shades of meaning, and occurs in the following 
senses in the Eng. Bible: (1) In its ht. sense: Lam 

3 51, "Mine eye affecteth my soul." (2) In the sense 
of "to endeavor after" '^'desire." "court": Gal 

4 17, "They zealously affect [RV ''seek"] you ... . 
that ye may affect [RV "seek"] them," i.e. they 
earnestly court your favor, that you may court 
theirs. Paul means that the proselytizing zeal 
of the Judaizers was rooted in personal ambition. 
The past part, "affected" (RV "sought") has the 
same meaning in ver 18. The same Gr word 
[zeUd) is tr* "desire earnestly" in RV (1 Cor 12 
31; 14 1.39). "Affect" has a similar meaning in 
Ecclus 13 11. (3) In the passive, it occurs in the 
sense of "to be disposed," in a neutral sense, with 
an advb. to characterize the nature of the disposi- 
tion: Acts 14 2, "evil affected against the brethren." 
So also 2 Mace 4 21; 13 26. 

"Affection" occurs in the following senses: (1) 
In the Ut. sense: the state of having one's feeUngs 
acted upon or affected in some way; bent or dis- 
position of mind, in a neutral sense (the nature of 
the affection, whether good or bad, needing further 
description in the context). So Col 3 2, "Set 
your affection [RV "mind"] on things above"; 
Col 3 5, "inordinate affection" (here "affection' 
by itself is neutral; the addition of the adj. makes 
it equivalent to "passion" in an evil sense, as in 
RV). (2) In a good sense: tender feeling, warm 
attachment, good will; the word in itself carrying 
a good meaning apart from the context. 1 Ch 29 




3, "because I have set my affection on the house of 
my God"; Rom 1 31; 2 Tim 3 3, "without natu- 
ral affection"; 2 Cor 6 12 "Ye are straitened in 
your own aifections" (ht. "bowels," regarded as the 
seat of kindly feelings; of Eng. "heart"). So 2 Cor 
7 15. (3) In an evil sense in the plur. = passions: 
Gal 6 24, "the flesh, with the affections [RV 
"passions"] and lusts"; Rom 1 26, "God gave them 
unto vile affections" (RV "passions"). 

"Affectioned" occurs once, in a neutral sense: 
Rom 12 10, "affectioned [i.e. "disposed"] one to 
another." In 1 Thess 2 8, we have "affection- 
ately," in a good sense. D. Miall Edwards 

AFFINITY, a-fin'i-ti Q'nn , hathan, "to join one- 
self"): This term is used three times in the OT: 
(1) in 1 K 3 1, where we read that "Solomon made 
affinity with Pharaoh king of Egypt"; (2) in 2 
Ch 18 1, where it is stated that Jehoshaphat 
"joined affinity with Ahab," and (3) in Ezr 9 14, 
where it is asked: "Shall we ... . join in affinity 
with the peoples that do these abominations?" 
The Heb word thus rendered in the above three 
passages refers in each case to marriage alHances 
rather than to family or poHtical relationships. See 
Makbiaqe; Family. W. W. Davies 

AFFIRM, AFFIRMATIVES, a-fdr'ma-tivs (8u<rx- 
vpl^ofiai, diischurizomai) : The verb "affirm" occurs 
in several passages of the NT in the sense of 
"assert" (Lk 22 59; Acts 12 15; 25 19 [<t><i<rKu, 
phd-sko]; Rom 3 8 [0w', phemi]; 1 Tim 1 7; 
Titus 3 8 [5ia/3e/3ai6o|tiai, diabebaioomai]. The Heb 
does not employ affirmative particles, but gives 
a positive reply by either repeating the word in 
question or by substituting the first person in the 
reply for the second person in the question, or 
by employing the formula: "Thou hast said or 
"Thou hast rightly said." The Saviour used this 
idiom (ffi ehas, sii eipas) when answering Judas 
and Caiaphas (Mt 26 25.64). A peculiar ele- 
gance occasionally attaches to the interpretation 
of the Scriptures because of their use of an affirma- 
tive and a negative together, rendering the sense 
more emphatic; sometimes the negative occurs 
first, as in Ps 118 17: "I shall not die, but live"; 
sometimes the affirmative precedes, as in Isa 38 1 : 
"Thou shalt die, and not five." Jn 1 20 is made 
peculiarly emphatic because of the negative placed 
between two affirmatives: "And he confessed, and 
denied not; and he confessed, I am not the Christ." 

Frank E. Hirsch 

AFFLICTION, a-flik'shun: Represents no fewer 
than 11 Heb words in the OT, and 3 Gr words in the 
NT, of which the most common are "^3^ ("3m), 
flXti/'is {Ihlipsis). It is used (1) actively = that 
which causes or tends to cause bodily pain or mental 
distress, as "the bread of affliction" (Dt 16 3; 
2 Ch 18 26); often in pi., as "Many are the 
afflictions of the righteous" (Ps 34 19); (2) 
passively = the state of being in pain or trouble, as 
"to visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction" 
(Jas 1 27). The following are the chief forms of 
affliction referred to: (1) Individual affliction, esp. 
sickness, poverty, the oppression of the weak by 
the strong and rich, perverted justice. (2) National. 
A great place is given in the OT to afiUction as a 
national experience, due to calamities, such as war, 
invasion, conquest by foreign peoples, exile. These 
form the background of much of the prophetic 
writings, and largely determine their tone and char- 
acter. (3) In the NT the chief form of affliction is 
that due to the fierce antagonism manifested to the 
religion of Jesus, resulting in persecution. 

/. The Source of Affliction. — The Heb mind did 
not dwell on secondary causes, but attributed 
everything, even afflictions, directly to the great 

Fu-st Cause and Author of all things: "Shall evil 

befall a city, and Jeh hath not done it?" (Am 3 6); 

"I form the light, and create darkness; 

1. God I make peace, and create evil [i.e. ca- 

lamity]; I am Jeh, that doeth all these 
things" (Isa 45 7). Thus all things, including ca- 
lamity, were referred to the Divine operation. The 
Heb when affUcted did not doubt the universal sover- 
eignty of God; yet, while assuming this sovereignty, 
he was sometimes tempted to accuse Him of indif- 
ference, neglect or forgetfulness. Cf Job passim; 
Isa 40 27; 49 14; Ezk 8 12; 9 9. 

Yet there are traces of a duahsm which assigns a 
certain vague hmit to God's absolute sovereignty, 

by referring affliction to an evil 

2. Evil agency acting in quasi-independence 
Agents of God. There could, however, never 

be more than a tendency in this direc- 
tion, for a strict dualism was incompatible with the 
standpoint of Jewish monotheism. Thus Saul's 
mental affliction is attributed to an "evil spirit," 
which is yet said to be "from Jeh" (1 S 16 14; 
18 10; 19 9); and the fall of Ahab is said by 
Mioaiah to be due to the "lying spirit" which enticed 
him to his doom, in obedience to God's command 
(1 K 22 20-22). In the prologue of Job, Job's 
calamities are ascribed to the Satan, but even 
he receives his word of command from God, and is 
responsible to Him, like the other "sons of God" 
who surround the heavenly throne. He is thus 
"included in the Divine will and in the circle of 
Divine providence" (Schultz). After the prologue, 
the Satan is left out of account, and Job's misfor- 
times are attributed directly to the Divine causality. 
In later Judaism, the tendency to trace the origin 
of evil, physical and moral, to wicked spirits became 
more marked, probably because of the influence of 
Pers dualism. In NT times, physical and mental 
maladies were thought to be due to the agency of 
evil spirits called demons, whose prince was Beelze- 
bub or Satan (Mk 1 23ff; 3 22 f; 6 2ff; Mt 9 
32 f, etc). Christ gave His assent to this belief 
(cf the woman imder infirmity, "whom Satan hath 
bound," Lk 13 16). Paul attributed his bodily 
affliction to an evil angel sent by Satan (2 Cor 
12 7), though he recognized that the evil agent 
was subordinate to God's purpose of grace, and was 
the means of moral discipline (vs 7.9). Thus, 
while the evil spirits were regarded as mahcious 
authors of physical maladies, they were not, in a 
strictly dualistic fashion, thought to act in complete 
independence; rather, they had a certain place 
assigned to them in the Divine Providence. 

//. Meaning and Purpose of Affliction. — ^Why 
did God afflict men? How is suffering to be ex- 
plained consistently with the goodness and justice 
of God? This was an acute problem which weighed 
heavfly upon the Heb mind, especiaUy in the later, 
more reflective, period. We can only briefly indi- 
cate the chief factors which the Scriptures con- 
tribute to the solution of the problem. We begin 
with the OT. 

The traditional view in early Heb theology was 
that afflictions were the result of the Divine law of 

retribution, by which sin was invari- 
1. Pimitive ably followed by adequate punish- 
or Retrib- ment. Every misfortune was a proof 
utive of sin on the part of the sufferer. 

Thus Job's "friends" sought to con- 
vince him that his great sufferings were due to his 
sinfulness. This is generally the standpoint of the 
historians of Israel, who regarded national calamities 
as a mark of the Divine displeasure on account of 
the people's sins. But this naive behef, though it 
contains an important element of truth, could not 
pass uncontested. The logic of facts would suffice 
to prove that it was inadequate to cover all cases; 




e.g. Jeremiah's sufferings were due, not to sin, but 
to his faithfulness to his prophetic vocation. So 
the "suffering servant" in Isa. Job, too, in spite 
of his many woes, was firm in the conviction of his 
own integrity. To prove the inadequacy of the 
penal view is a main purpose of the Book of Job. 
A common modification of the traditional view was, 
that the sorrows of the pious and the prosperity of 
the wicked were only of brief duration; in the course 
of time, things would adjust themselves aright (e.g. 
Job 20 5ff; Ps 73 3-20). But even granting time 
for the law of retribution to work itself out, experi- 
ence contradicts the view that a man's fortune or mis- 
fortune is an infallible proof of his moral quality. 

The thought is often expressed that afflictions are 

meant to test the character or faith of the sufferer. 

This idea is especially prominent in 

2. Proba- Job. God allowed the Satan to test 
tional the reality of Job's piety by over- 
whelming him with disease and mis- 
fortunes (2). Throughout the poem Job main- 
tains that he has stood the test (e.g. 23 10-12). 
Cf Dt 8 2.16; Ps 66 10 f; 17 3; Isa 48 10; Jer 
9 7; Prov 17 3. 

For those who are able to stand the test, suffering 

has a purificatory or disciplinary value. (1) The 

thought of affliction as a discipline or 

3. Disci- form of Divine teaching is found in 
plinary and Job, especially in the speeches of Elihu, 
Purificatory who insists that tribulation is intended 

as a method of instruction to save man 
from the pride and presumption that issue in destruc- 
tion (Job 33 14-30; 36 8-10.15 RV). The same 
conception is found in Ps 94 12; 119 67.71. (2) 
The purificatory function of trials is taught in such 
passages as Isa 1 25; Zee 13 9; Mai 3 2.3, where 
the process ef refining metals in fire and smelting out 
the dross is the metaphor used. 

The above are not fully adequate to explain the 

mystery of the afflictions of the godly. The pro- 

foundest contribution in the OT to a 

4. Vicarious solution of the problem is the idea of 
and Re- the vicarious and redemptive sig- 
demptive nificance of pain and sorrow. The 

author of Job did not touch this rich 
vein of thought in dealing with the afflictions of his 
hero. This was done by the author of the Second- 
Isa. The classical passage is Isa 52 13— 53, which 
deals with the woes of the oppressed and afflicted 
Servant of God with profound spiritual insight. 
It makes no difference to the meaning of the afflic- 
tions whether we understand by the Servant the 
whole Heb nation, or the pious section of it, or an 
individual member of it, and whether the speakers 
in 53 are the Jewish nation or the heathen. The 
significant point here is the value and meaning 
ascribed to the Servant's sufferings. The speakers 
had once beUeved (in accordance with the tradi- 
tional view) that the Servant suffered because God 
was angry with him and had stricken him. JNow 
thev confess that his sorrows were due, not to his 
own sin but to theirs (vs 4-6.8). His sufferings 
were not only vicarious (the punishment ot their 
sin falling upon him), but redemptive in their 
effect (peace and health coming to them as a result 
of his chastisement). Moreover, it was not onl^ 
redemptive, but expiatory ("his soul gmlt-offering, 
ygj. 10)— a remarkable adumbration of the Chris- 
tian doctrine of atonement. . , „„ , , . 

So far we have dealt only with OT teaching on 
the meaning and purpose of affliction, ihe NL 

makes no new contribution to the 
5 The solution of the problem, but repeats 

New Tes- and greatly deepens the points of 
tament view already found m the Ul. (.1) 

There is a recognition throughout 
the NT of the law of retribution (Gal 6 7). Yet 

Jesus repudiates the popular view of the invariable 
connection between misfortune and moral evil 
(Jn 9 2f). It is clear that He had risen above 
the conception of God's relation to man as merely 
retributive (Mt 5 45, sunshine and rain for evil 
men as well as for the good). His followers would 
suffer tribulation even more than unbelievers, 
owing to the hostile reaction of the evil world, 
similar to that which afflicted Christ Himself 
(Mt 5 10 f; 10 16-25; Jn 15 18-20; 16 33). 
Similarly the Acts and the epp. frequently refer to 
the sufferings of Christians (e.g. Acts 14 22; 2 Cor 
4 8-11; Col 1 24; He 10 32; 1 Pet 4 13; Rev 
7 14). Hence afflictions must have some other 
than a purely punitive purpose. (2) They are 
probational, affording a test by which the spurious 
may be separated from the genuine members of the 
Christian church (Jas 1 3.12; 1 Pet 1 7; 4 17), 
and (3) a means of discipline, calculated to purify 
and train the character (Rom 5 3; 2 Cor 12 7.9; 
Jas 1 3). (4) The idea of vicarious and redemp- 
tive suffering gets a far deeper significance in the 
NT than in the OT, and finds concrete realization in 
a historical person, Jesus Christ. That which is 
foreshadowed in Seoond-Isa becomes in the NT a 
central, pervasive and creative thought. A unique 
place in the Divine purpose is given to the passion 
of Christ. Yet in a sense, His followers partake of 
His vicarious sufferings, and "fill up ... . that 
which is lacking of the afflictions of Christ" (Col 
1 24; cf Phil 3 10; 1 Pet 4 13). Here, surely, 
is a profound thought which may throw a flood of 
light on the deep mystery of human affliction. The 
cross of Christ furnishes the key to the meaning of 
sorrow as the greatest redemptive force in the uni- 

///. Endurance of Affliction. — The Scriptures 
abound in words of consolation and exhortation 
adapted to encourage the afflicted. Two main 
considerations may be mentioned. (1) The thought 
of the beneficent sovereignty of God. "Jeh reigneth; 
let the earth rejoice," even though "clouds and 
darkness are round about him" (Ps 97 1.2); "All 
things work together for good to them that love 
God" (Rom 8 28 AV). Since love is on the throne 
of the universe, we may rest assured that all 
things are meant for our good. (2) The thought 
that tribulation is of brief duration, in comparison 
with the joy that shall follow (Ps 30 5; Isa 64 
7f; Jn 16 22); a thought which culminates in 
the hope of immortality. This hope is in the OT 
only beginning to dawn, and gives but a faint and 
flickering light, except in moments of rare exalta- 
tion and insight, when the thought of a perfect 
future tjlessedness seemed to offer a solution of 
the enigmas of life (Job 19 25-27; Pss 37, 49, 73), 
But in the NT it is a postulate of faith, and by it the 
Christian is able to fortify himself in affliction, re- 
membering that his affliction is light and momen- 
tary compared with the "far more exceeding and 
eternal weight of glory" which is to issue out of it 
(2 Cor 4 17 AV; cf Mt 5 12; Rom 8 18). Akin 
to this is the comfort derived from the thought of 
the near approach of Christ's second coming (Jas 
6 7.8). In view of such truths as these, the Bible 
encourages the pious in trouble to show the spirit 
of patience (Ps 37 7; Lk 21 19; Rom 12 12; Jas 

1 3.4; 5 7-11; 1 Pet 2 20), and even the spirit of 
positive joy in tribulation (Mt 5 11 f ; Rom 5 3; 

2 Cor 12 10; Jas 1 2.12; 1 Pet 4 13). In the 
NT emphasis is laid on the example of Jesus in 
patient endurance in suffering (Jn 16 33; Jas 5 
7-11; 1 Pet 2 19-23; 3 17 f). Above all, the 
Scriptures recommend the afflicted to take refuge in 
the supreme blessedness of fellowship with God, 
and of trust in His love, by which they may enter 
into a deep peace that is undisturbed by the trials 




and problems of life (Ps 73, esp. 23-28: Isa 26 
3.4; Jn 14 L27; Phil 4 7; et passim). 

D. MiALL Edwards 
AFFRIGHT, a-frit' : Designates a state of terror 
occasioned by some unexpected and startling 
occurrence; not as strong as "amazed," which 
refers more to the stupor resulting from fright. 
In the NT most frequently for €p.<l>o§os, emphobos 
(Lk 24 37; Acts 10 4; Rev 11 13). RV uses it 
also for pturdmenoi of Phil 1 28, a word "properly 
used of soared horses" (EDicott). 

AFOOT, a-foot' (mjevw, pezeuo, "to go on foot"): 
By walking from Troas to Assos Paul avoided the 
tedious voyage round Cape Lectum (Acts 20 13 
AV; cf Mk 6 33). 

AFORE, a-for': Archaic for "before" of time, or 
"formerly"; frequently occurs as compound, as in 
"aforetime," "aforehand," etc; in the NT most 
commonly for the Gr prefix irp6, prd, in compound 
words (Rom 1 2; 15 4); at other times, for Gr 
advb. irord, pote, "at some time," "once" (Jn 9 13; 
1 Pet 3 5; Col 3 7). 

AFRESH, a-fresh': Only in He 6 6, "seeing they 
crucify' to themselves the Son of God afresh," 
where it stands for the prefix of the Gr anastau- 
ToiXntas. It has been disputed whether in this word 
ana has the reiterative force ("again," "anew"). 
In classical Gr anastaurdo has always the simple 
sense of "to crucify," (i.e. "to raise up on a cross," 
ana being merely "up"). So some would render it 
here (e.g. Cremer, Lex. of NT Gr). Against this 
it is argued (1) that the classical writers had no 
occasion for the idea of crucifying anew (cf Winer, 
De verb. Camp., etc, Pt III, 9ff, Leipzig, 1843); 
(2) that in many compounds ana signifies both "up" 
and "again " as in anahUpo. which means "to re- 
cover sight as well as "to look up"; (3) that the 
rendering "crucify afresh" suits the context; (4) 
that the Gr expositors (e.g. Chrys) take it so with- 
out questioning. (So also Bleek, Liinemann, Al- 
ford, Westcott; cf Vulg rursum crueifigentes.) 

D. MiALL Edwabds 

AFRICA, af'ri-ka: The name of this tract, as a 
continent, does not occur in the Bible, and it was only 
in later days known as one of the 
1. Africa as quarters of the world, under the name 
Known of Libya— that portion opposite the 

to the coast of Greece and W. of Egypt. 

Ancients Naturally the most considerable part 
of Africa known to the Hebrews 
was Egypt 'itself, but Libya is regarded as being 
referred to under the names of Lehabim and Lubim 
(Ludim) (Gen 10 13; 2 Ch 12 3)— words indicat- 
ing, as often with the Semites, not the country 
itself, but its inhabitants. Other portions of 
Africa known to the Hebrews were Cush or Ethiopia, 
and Put, whose inhabitants they regarded as be- 
longing to the Hamitic stock. Canaan, also Cushite 
. and therefore Hamitic, naturally did not belong to 
the African continent, showing that the divisions 
of the then known world into "quarters" (Europe, 
Asia, Africa) had not taken place when the Table 
of the Nations (Gen 10 1 ff ) was drawn up — indeed, 
these divisions were not apparently thought of 
until many centuries later. The Casluhim and the 
Naphtuhim (Gen 10 13.14) were in all probability 
African peoples, though their position is in general 
regarded as uncertain. For the Hebrews, to all 
appearance, the southernmost point of Africa was 
Cush or Ethiopia, called by the Assyrians and 
Babylonians Kusu and Meluhha (Meroe), which 
included the district now known as the Soudan, or 
Black region. The sons of Cush, and also those 
of his firstborn, Sheba, were all Arabian tribes. 

nominally under the domain of Mizraim or Egypt, 
and on this account classed with the descendants 
of Ham. 

It will thus be seen that the Negro districts were 

practically unknown to the ancient Hebrews, 

though men and women of Negro race 

2. The must have come within their ken. It 
Cushites seems doubtful, therefore, whether 
and the there be, in the Bible, any reference 
Negroes to that race, either collectively or 

individually, the word Cushite stand- 
ing, not for Negro, but for Ethiopian. This term 
is applied to Moses' (first) wife (Nu 12 1); and it 
will probably be generally admitted, that the great 
Hebrew lawgiver is not likely to have espoused a 
Negro woman. The Ethiopian eunuch converted 
by PhiUp the Evangelist (Acts 8 26 ff) was an of- 
ficial of Meroe, and an educated man, for he could 
read the OT in the Gr (Sept) version. Commerce 
must have revealed to the Hebrews the where- 
abouts of the various peoples of Africa with whom 
they came into contact, and they acquired a personal 
knowledge of Egypt when the 12 tribes were in 
bondage there. During this period, it may be 
supposed, they saw from time to time visitors from 
the South — people who are not mentioned in the 
sacred books of the OT because the Hebrews, as a 
nation, never came into contact with them. Apart 
from Egypt, the history of the portion of Africa 
known to the Hebrews was a chequered one, as it 
came successively under Egyp, Phoen, Gr and Rom 
civihzation. That it was not overrun, or even 
influenced, by the barbarous tribes of the South, 
is due to the fact that the Mediterranean tract is 
isolated from the central (and southern) portion of 
that continent by the Sahara. In the Talm it is 

related that Alexander penetrated 

3. Hebrew Africa on Libyan asses to find a race 
Tradition of women, with whom he had conver- 
sation, and from whom, as he after- 
ward confessed, being a fool, he learned wisdom — a 
legend suggesting some possible tradition of the 
Amazons of Dahomey. But even in the Talm 
it is mainly the nearer (N.E.) portion of Africa which 
is referred to, the Africans, who had the reputation 
of being flat-footed, being associated with the 
Canaanites. See also Cush; Ethiopia; Mizkaim. 

T. G. Pinches 
AFTER, aft'er, AFTERWARD, aft'er-werd: The 
fundamental thought, in which all shades of mean- 
ing unite, is that of succession either in time or 
place. This succession may be immediate or remote. 
A very common adaptation of this conception is 
the use of "after" to denote "according to," "after 
the manner of," or "in the order of," as in Gen 
1 26; Eph 4 24; Lk 1 59; Rom 5 14; He 4 11 
(RVm "unto"), and in many passages where the Gr 
uses the preposition Kurd, katd, as Mt 23 3; Rom 
8 4; 1 Cor 1 26, etc. "In proportion to'': Ps 
28 4; cf 90 15. It sometimes correctly translates 
a peculiar Gr idiom of the prep. Sii, did, with the 
gen, indicating time elapsed, as Mk 2 1, lit. 
"through some days," "after some days had 
passed' , cf Acts 24 17. While the Gr is expressed 
by a variety of words, the Heb uses 'ahar for both 
prep, and advb. H. E. Jacobs 

AFTERNOON, af-tgr-ndon' (DTH niuj , nHoth 
hxiryom, "the declining of the day"; Jgs 19 8 AV): 
The expression Di'^H Ohs, k^hom ha-yom, "in the 
heat of the day" (Gen 18 1) refers to the early 
afternoon when the sun is a little past its zenith, its 
rays still being very strong. The phrase 'HTh 
DT'n , I'-rW^h hor-yom, "in the cool of the day" 
(Gen 3 8) is in contrast to the last phrase and points 
to the late afternoon; in the Orient a cooling breeze 




arises at this period of the day, and it is then that 
much of the day's business is transacted. See Day. 

AGABA, ag'a-ba: A fortress in Judaea. The first 
of 22 "strong places" which by its commander 
Galestus was given over to Aristobulus, the son of 
Alexander Janneus and Alexandra, when he (his 
mother, the queen, being dangerously ill) attempted 
to get control of the Judaean government {Ant, XIII, 
xvi, 5). 

AGABUS, ag'a-bus ("AYaPos, Agabos) :' A Chris- 
tian prophet of Jerus, twice mentioned in Acts. 

(1) In Acts 11 27 f , we find him at Antioch foretell- 
ing "a great famine over all the world," "which," 
adds the historian, "came to pass in the days of 
Claudius." This visit of Agabus to Antioch took 
place in the winter of 43-44 AD, and was the 
means of urging the Antiochian Christians to send 
rehef to the brethren in Judaea by the hands of 
Barnabas and Saul. Two points should be noted, 
(a) The gift of prophecy here takes the form of 
prediction. The prophet's chief function was to 
reveal moral and spiritual truth, to "forth-tell" 
rather than to "foretell"; but the interpretation of 
God's message sometimes took the form of pre- 
dicting events. (6) The phrase "over all the 
world" (practically synonymous with the Rom 
Empire) must be regarded as a rhetorical exagger- 
ation if strictly interpreted as pointing to a general 
and simultaneous famine. But there is ample 
evidence of severe periodical famines in various 
localities in the reign of Claudius (e.g. Suet. Claud. 
18; Tac. Ann. xii.43), and of a great dearth in 
Judaea under the procurators Cuspius Fadus and 
Tiberius Alexander, 44-48 AD (Ant, XX, ii, 6; v, 2), 
which probably reached its climax cir 46 AD. 

(2) In Acts 21 10 f we find Agabus at Caesarea 
warning Paul, by a vivid symboUc action (after 
the manner of OT prophets; cf Jer 13 1 ff; Ezk 
3, 4) of the imprisonment and suffering he would 
undergo if he proceeded to Jerus. (3) In late 
tradition Agabus is included in lists of the seventy 
disciples of Christ. D. Mi all Edwards 

AGADE, ag'a-de: Ancient name for Akkad (or 
AccAD, q.v.), one of the chief cities of Babylonia 
(Gen 10 10), and the capital city of Sargon, who 
lived and ruled in Babylonia cu: 3500 BC . Together 
with Shunir it formed part of one of the royal titles: 
"kings of Shunir [Sumer] and Accad." 

AGAG, a'gag (^Ji^, '&ghagh, or aJX, 'S.ghagh, 
meaning unknown, possibly "violent," BDB): A 
name, or title, appUed to the king of the Amalekites, 
Uke Abimelech in PhiUstia and Pharaoh in Egypt. 
It is used of two of these kings: (1) A kmg of Amar 
lek, mentioned by Balaam (Nu 24 7) m his blessmg 
of Israel; (2) A later king, in the days of King Saul 
(1 S 15). Saul was sent with his army to destroy 
the Amalekites, who had so violently opposed 
Israel in the Wilderness. He disregarded the 
Divine command, sparing the best of the spoil, and 
saving Agag the king alive (1 S 15 8.9). After 
rebuking Saul, Samuel had Agag put to death for 
all the atrocities committed by himself and his 
nation (1 S 15 32.33). Edward Mack 

AGAGITE, a'gag-It, ("^ajS, 'dghaghi, from 53S, 
'tlghagh, "a member of the house of Agag"): A title 
of opprobrium given to Haman (Est 3 1.10; 
8 3.5; 9 24). Jewish tradition always assigned 
the arch-enemies of Israel membership in the house 
of Amalek, the hereditary foe of the nation. Cf 
Ant, XI, vi, 5. The word Agag has properly been 
taken by DeUtzsch as related to the Assyr agagu, 
"to be powerful," "vehement," "angry." In the 

Gr parts of Est, Haman is termed a Macedonian 
(12 6; 16 10). The name Haman is probably of 
Elamitic origin. Oppert's attempt to connect the 
term "Agagite" with "Agaz," a Median tribe men- 
tioned by Sargon, has found no supporters. See 
Agag. H. J. Wolf 

AGAIN, a-gen': Advb. denoting repetition; in 
NT, generally for Trd\tv, pdlin, "back," "once 
more." Occasionally, it has the force of a con- 
nective, synonymous with "moreover," as in Rom 
15 10 ff; 1 Cor 3 20, etc. The expression "born 
again" of AV, Jn 3 3.7; 1 Pet 1 23, translating 
the Gr "dnothen" and "and" in comp, becomes in 
RV "anew," i.e. "over again." As these particles 
mean "from above" and "up," their use as indi- 
cating repetition is sometimes disputed, but without 
further foundation than that "again" does not 
exhaust the meaning. 

AGAIN, BORN. See Regeneration. 

AGAINST, a-genst' (Kara, katd; 4vavT£ov, enanti- 
on; irp6s, prds): Prep, expressing contrast. When 
used of direction, equivalent to "toward" (Mt 
10 35; 12 14, etc) ; when of position, meaning 
"opposite," "facing," "in front of" (1 K 7 5; 
Gen 16 10; Rom 8 31); when of action, "opposed 
to" (Mt 5 11; 26 59; 1 Cor 4 6); "in resistance 
to" (He 12 4); "provision for" (Gr eis, lit. "unto, 
toward" (1 Tim 6 19). Sometimes also applied 
to what breaks an established order as "customs" 
(Acts 28 17), "nature" (Rom 1 26). Pecuhar shades 
of meaning may be traced by careful examination 
of the variety of preps, in Heb and Gr employed 
in the Scriptures, that are translated into English 
by this one word. H. E. Jacobs 

AGAPE, ag'a-pe {a.y6.irr\, agdpe): The name 
Agape or "love-feast," as an expression denoting 

the brotherly common meals of the 
1. The early church, though of constant use 

Name and in the post-canonical literature from 
the Thing the time of Ignatius onward, is found 

in the NT only in Jude ver 12 and 
in 2 Pet 2 13 according to a very doubtful reading. 
For the existence of the Christian common meal, 
however, we have abundant NT evidence. The 
"breaking of bread" practised by the primitive 
community in Jerusalem according to Acts 2 42.46 
must certainly be interpreted in the light of Pau- 
hne usage (1 Cor 10 16; 11 24) as referring to 
the ceremonial act of the Lord's Supper. But the 
added clause in ver 46, "they took their food 
with gladness and singleness of heart," impUes 
that a social meal was connected in some way with 
this ceremonial act. Paul's references to the abuses 
that had sprung up in the Corinthian church at the 
meetings for the observance of the Lord's Supper 
(1 Cor 11 20-22.33.34) make it evident that in 
Corinth as in Jerusalem the celebration of the rite 
was associated with participation in a meal of a more 
general character. And in one of the "we" sections 
of Acts (20 11) where Luke is giving personal testi- 
mony as to the manner in which the Lord's Supper 
was observed by Paul in a church of his own found- 
ing, we find the breaking of bread associated with 
and yet distinguished from an eating of food, in a 
manner wliieh makes it natural to conclude that in 
Troas, as in Jerusalem and Corinth, Christians 
when they met together on the first day of the week 
were accustomed to partake of a common meal. 
The fact that the name Agape or love-feast used 
in Jude ver 12 (RV) is found early in the 2d cent, 
and often afterward as a technical expression for 
the religious common meals of the church puts the 
meaning of Jude's reference beyond doubt. 




So far as the Jerusalem community was con- 
cerned, the common meal appears to have sprung 
out of the koinonia or communion that 

2. Origin of characterized the first days of the 
the Agape Christian church (cf Acts 1 14; 2 1 

etc). The religious meals familiar to 
Jews — the Passover being the great type — would 
make it natural in Jerusalem to give expression by 
means of table fellowship to the sense of brother- 
hood; and the community of goods practised by 
the infant church (2 44; 4 32) would readily take 
the particular form of a common table at which the 
wants of the poor were supplied out of the abundance 
of the rich (6 1 ff). The presence of the Agape 
in the Gr chm-ch of Corinth was no doubt due to the 
initiative of Paul, who would hand on the observ- 
ances associated with the Lord's Supper just as 
he had received them from the earlier disciples; 
but participation in a social meal would commend 
itself very easily to men familiar with the common 
meals that formed a regular part of the procedure 
at meetings of those religious clubs and associa- 
tions which were so numerous at that time through- 
out the Gr-Rom world. 

In the opinion of the great majority of scholars 
the Agape was a meal at which not oiily bread and 

wine but all kinds of viands were used, 

3. Relation a meal which had the double purpose 
to the of satisfying hunger and thirst and 
Eucharist giving expression to the sense of Chris- 
tian brotherhood. At the end of this 

feast, bread and wine were taken according to the 
Lord's command, and after thanksgiving to God 
were eaten and drunk in remembrance of Christ 
and as a special means of communion with the 
Lord Himself and through Him with one another. 
The Agape was thus related to the Eucharist as 
Christ's last Passover to the Christian rite which 
He grafted upon it. It preceded and led up to the 
Eucharist, and was quite distinct from it. In 
opposition to this view it has been strongly urged 
by some modern critical scholars that in the apos- 
tohc age the Lord's Supper was not distinguished 
from the Agape, but that the Agape itself from 
beginning to end was the Lord's Supper which was 
held in memory of Jesus. It seems fatal to such 
an idea, however, that while Paul makes it quite 
evident that bread and wine were the only elements 
of the memorial rite instituted by Jesus (1 Cor 11 
23-29), the abuses which had come to prevail at the 
social gatherings of the Corinthian church would 
have been impossible in the case of a meal consisting 
only of bread and wine (cf vs 21.33 f). More- 
over, unless the Eucharist in the apostolic age had 
been discriminated from the common meal, it 
would be difficult to explain how at a later period 
the two could be found diverging from each other 
so completely. 

In the Did (cir 100 AD) there is no sign as yet 

of any separation. The direction that the second 

Eucharistic prayer should be offered 

4. Separa- "after being filled" (x.l) appears to 
tion from imply that a regular meal had imme- 
the diately preceded the observance of the 
Eucharist sacrament. In the Ignatian Epistles 

(cir 110 AD) the Lord's Supper and 
the Agape are still found in combination {Ad 
Smyrn viii.2). It has sometimes been assumed that 
Pliny's letter to Trajan (cir 112 AD) proves that 
the separation had aheady taken place, for he 
speaks of two meetings of the Christians in Bithyn- 
ia, one before the dawn at which they bound them- 
selves by a "sacramentum" or oath to do no kind 
of crime, and another at a later hour when they 
partook of food of an ordinary and harmless char- 
acter (Ep X.96). But as the word "sacramentum" 
cannot be taken here as necessarily or even prob- 

ably referring to the Lord's Supper, the evidence of 
this passage is of httle weight. When we come to 
Justin Martyr (cir 150 AD) we find that in his 
account of church worship he does not mention the 
Agape at all, but speaks of the Eucharist as follow- 
ing a service which consisted of the reading of 
Scripture, prayers and exhortation (Apol, Ixvii); 
so that by his time the separation must have taken 
place. TertuUian (cir 200 AD) testifies to the 
continued existence of the Agape {Apol, 39), but 
shows clearly that in the church of the West the 
Eucharist was no longer associated with it {De 
Corona, 3). In the East the connection appears 
to have been longer maintained (see Bigg, Christian 
Platonists of Alexandria, 102 ff), but by and by 
the severance became universal; and though the 
Agape continued for long to maintain itself as a 
social function of the church, it gradually passed 
out of existence or was preserved only as a feast 
of charity for the poor. 

Various influences appear to have cooperated 
in this direction. Trajan's enforcement of the old 
law against clubs may have had some- 
5. Reasons thing to do with it (cf Pliny as above), 
for the but a stronger influence probably 

Separation came from the rise of a popular sus- 
picion that the evening meals of the 
church were scenes of licentious revelry and even 
of crime. The actual abuses which already meet 
us in the apostolic age (1 Cor 11 20 if; Jude ver 
12), and which would tend to multiply as the church 
grew in numbers and came into closer contact with 
the heathen world, might suggest the advisability 
of separating the two observances. But the 
strongest influence of all would come from the 
growth of the ceremonial and sacerdotal spirit 
by which Christ's simple institution was slowly 
tm-ned into a mysterious priestly sacrifice. To 
Christ Himself it had seemed natural and fitting 
to institute the Supper at the close of a social meal. 
But when this memorial Supper had been trans- 
formed into a repetition of the sacrifice of Calvary 
by the action of the ministering priest, the ascetic 
idea became natural that the Eucharist ought to 
be received fasting, and that it would be sacri- 
legious to link it on to the observances of an 
ordinary social meal. 

LiTEHATTjRE. — Zahn, art. "Agapen" in Hauck-Herzog, 
Realencyklopadie; Keating, Agape and Eucharist; Schaff, 
The Oldest Church Manual, ch xviii; Lambert, Sacra- 
ments in the New Testament, Lect viii; WeizsScker, The 
Apostolic Age, etc, I, 52 ff. 

J. C. Lambeet 
AGAR, a'gar ("A-yap, Agar): Found once in the 
Apoc in the Gr (Bar 3 23) probably for the OT 
Hagar, mother of Ishmael, whose children are men- 
tioned with the merchants of Meran (Midian) and 
Teman. In 1 Ch 5 10 the "Hagarites" AV, are 
located E. of Gilead, and in the days of Saul were 
at war with the tribe of Reuben. See also vs 19.20 
andl Ch 27 31. In Ps 83 6 the name of the same 
people is Hagarenes. 

AGARENES, ag-a-renz': Bar 3 23 AV. In the 
OT the word is Hagarenes (q.v.). See also Agar 

AGATE, ag'fit. See Stones, Precious. 

AGE, aj: A period of time or a dispensation. 
In the above sense the word, occurs only once in 
AV, in the sing., as the tr of ^T\ , dor, which means, 
properly, a "revolution" or "round of time," "a 
period," "an age" or "generation of man's life"; 
almost invariably tr"* "generation," "generations" 
(Job 8 8, "Inquire, I pray thee, of the former age") : 
we have the plur. as the tr of aion, prop, "dilation,' 
"the course or flow of time," "an age or period of 




the world," "the world" (Eph 2 7, "in the ages 
to come"; Col 1 26, "the mystery which hath been 
hid from ages and from generations," ERV, "from 
all ages," etc, ARVm, of geneai, "generations" 
(Eph 3 5 "generations," ver 21. "unto all genera- 
tions for ever and ever," Gr m, all the generations 
of the age of the ages"). "Ages" is given in m of 
AV (Ps 145 13; Isa 26 4, "the rock of ages"). 

We have "age" in the above sense (2 Esd 3 18; 
Tob 14 5; aion) "ages," aion (1 Esd 4 40 [of 
Truth] "she is the strength," etc, "of all ages"), 
genea, RV, "generation" (Wisd 7 27; 1 Mace 2 
61); Ecclus 24 33, eis geneds aionon, "generations 
of ages"; Wisd 14 6, "generations" (geneseos). 

RV has "age" for "world" (He 6 5); "ages" for 
"worlds" (RVm He 1 2; ARVm; cf 1 Tim 1 17) 
(m, "unto the ages of the ages"); "ages" for 
"world" (1 Cor 10 11; He 9 26). ERV has "all 
ages" for "the beginning of the world" (Eph 3 9, 
ARV "for ages"); "king of the ages" for "king of 
saints" (Rev 15 3, corrected text; m, many ancient 
authorities read "nations"; Jer 10 7). See Ever- 
lasting. W.L.Walker 

AGE, OLD AGE, in individual lives (""jn , heledh; 
T|\i.K[a, helikia): We have scarcely any word in 
the OT or NT which denotes "age" in the familiar 
modern sense; the nearest in the OT is perhaps 
heledh, "hfe," "lifetime," and in the NT helikia, 
"full age," "manhood," but which is rendered 
"stature" in Mt 6 27, etc, AV; ?ieted/i occurs (Job 11 
17, "Thine age shall be clearer than the noonday," 
RV "[thy] life"; Ps 39 6, "Mine age is as nothing 
before thee," ARV, "my life-time"); we have 
helikia (Jn 9 21.23, "He is of age"; He 11 11 ; 
"past age," Lk 2 52, "Jesus increased in wisdom 
and age," so RVm, AVm, Eph 4 13); yom, day, 
(days), is used in the OT to express "age" (Gen 47 
28), "the whole age of Jacob," AV, "the days of the 
years of his life"; but it occurs mostly in connec- 
tion with old age) ; ben, "son" (Nu 8 25; 1 Ch 23 
3.24); kelah, "to be complete," is tr"* "full age" 
(Job 5 26); teleios, "complete" (He 6 14, RV, 
"fuUgrown men," m, "perfect"), dor, "a revolu- 
tion," "a period" is tr^ "age" (Isa 38 12, "Mine 
age is departed and removed from me as a shepherd's 
tent," ARV, "My dwelling is removed, and is 
carried away from me as a shepherd's tent," ERV, 
"mine age," m, "or habitation"; Dehtzsch, "my 
home"; cf Ps 49 19 [20]; 2 Cor 5 8). In NT 
we have etos, "year" (Mk 5 42, RV, "old"; Lk 2 
37; 3 23, "Jesus .... about 30 years of age"). 
"Old age;," "aged," are the tr of various words, za-ken 
{zakan, "the chin," "the beard"), perhaps to have 
the chin sharp or hanging down, often tr'' "elders," 
"old man," etc (2 S 19 32; Job 12 20; 32 9; Jer 
6 11). 

In NT we have preshutes, "aged," "advanced in 
days" (Titus 2 2; Philem 9); presbMis, "aged 
woman" (Titus 2 3); probebekos en hemerais, "ad- 
vanced in days" (Lk 2 36); gtras, "old age" (Lk 
1 36). 

RV has "old" for "the age of" (1 Ch 23 3), 
"own age" for "sort" (Dnl 1 10); "aged" for 
"ancients" (Ps 119 100); for "ancient" (Isa 47 6); 
for "old" (He 8 13); "aged men" for "the ancients' 
(Job 12 12); for "aged" (Job 12 20), "elders." 

(1) Among the Hebrews (and Orientals generally) 
old age was held in honor, and respect was required 
for the aged (Lev 19 32), "Thou shalt 
Regard for rise up before the hoary head, and 
Old Age honor the face of the old man"; a 
mark of the low estate of the nation 
was that "The faces of elders were not honored"; 
"The elders have ceased from the gate" (Lam 5 
12 14). Cf Job 29 8 (as showing the exceptionally 

high regard for Job). See also Wisd 2 10; Ecclus 
8 6. 

(2) Old age was greatly desired and its attain- 
ment regarded as a Divine blessing (Gen 15 15; 
Ex 20 12, "that thy days maybe long in the land"; 
Job 5 26; Ps 91 16, "With long life will I satisfy 
him"; 92 14; cf Isa 65 20; Zee 8 4; 1 S 2 32). 

(3) A Divine assurance is given, "Even to old 
age I am he, and even to hoar hairs will I carry you" 
(Isa 46 4) ; hence it was looked forward to in faith 
and hope (Ps 71 9.18). 

(4) Superior wisdom was believed to belong to 
the aged (Job 12 20; 15 10; 32 7.9; cf 1 K 12 
8) ; hence positions of guidance and authority were 
given to them, as the terms "elders," "pres- 
byters" and (Arab.) "sheik" indicate. 

W. L. Walker 
AGEE, a'ge (X3S, 'aghe', "fugitive"): AHararite, 
father of Shammah, one of David's "three mighty 
men" (2 S 23 11). In 1 Ch 11 34 we read of 
one "Jonathan the son of Shagee the Hararite." 
The parallel in 2 S 23 32.33 reads "Jonathan, 
Shammah the Hararite." If we read "Jonathan 
[son of] Shammah," then Agee is the grandfather of 
Jonathan. Some, however, think 1 Ch 11 34 
to be correct, and read "Shagee" for "Agee" in 
2 S 23 11, and for "Shammah" in 2 S 23 33. 
This makes Jonathan and Shammah brothers. 

AGES, ROCK OF: Applied to Jehovah as an 
encouragement for trust (Isa 26 4 RVm; AV 
"everlasting strength"). 

AGGABA, a-ga'ba ('A-y^apol, Aggabd, and 'Aypa- 
Pii, Agrabd; AV Graba) = Hagabah (Ezr 2 45) 
and Hagaba (Neh 7 48) : The descendants of A. 
(temple-servants) returned with Zerubbabel to 
Jerus (1 Esd 5 29). See also Accaba. ' 

AGGAEUS, a-ge'us ('A-y7atos, Aggaios; AV 
Aggeus): Haggai, one of the Minor Prophets. A. 
prophesied in the second year of the reign of Darius 
(cf Ezr 4 24; 5 1) with Zacharias in Jerus (1 Esd 
6 1; 7 3). In 2 Esd 1 40 he is mentioned as one 
who with others shall be given as "leader to the 
nation from the east." 

AGIA, a'gi-a ('A-yia, Agid; AV Hagia) = Hattil 
(Ezr 2 57; Neh 7 59): The descendants of A. (sons 
of the servants of Solomon) returned with Zerubbabel 
to Jerus (1 Esd 5 34). 

AGONE, a-gon': In AV of 1 S 30 13. Old past 
part, of "to go." RV has "ago," viz. "three days 
ago," lit. "the third day." 

AGONY, ag'o-ni (d7o>vCo, agonia; Vulg agonia): 
A word occurring only once in the NT (Lk 22 44), 
and used to describe the climax of the mysterious 
soul-conflict and unspeakable suffering of Our Lord 
in the garden at Gethsemane. The term is derived 
from the Gr agon "contest" and this in turn from 
the Gr dgo "to drive or lead," as in a chariot race. 
Its root idea is the struggle and pain of the severest 
athletic contest or conflict. The wrestling of the 
athlete has its counterpart in the wrestling of the 
suffering soul of the Saviour in the garden. At the 
beginning of this struggle He speaks of His soul 
being exceeding son;owful even unto death, and 
this tumult of emotion culminated in the agony. 
All that can be suggested by the exhausting 
struggles and sufferings of charioteers, runners, 
wrestlers and gladiators, in Grecian and Roman 
amphitheaters, is summed up in the pain and death- 
struggle of this solitary word "agony." The word 
was rendered by Wyclif (1382) "maad in agonye"; 
1 Tindale (1534) and following translators use "an 




agony." The record of Jesus' suffering in Gethsem- 
ane, in the Synoptic Gospels (Mt 26 36-46; Mk 14 
32-42; Lk 22 39-46, and also in He 5 7.8) indicates 
that it was threefold: 

The agony of His soul wrought its pain on His 

body, until "his sweat became as it were great 

drops of blood falling down upon the 

1. Physical ground" (Lk 22 44, omitted by some 

ancient authorities). He offered His 
prayers and suppUcations "with strong crying and 
tears" (He 5 7). The intensity of His struggle so 
distressed and weakened Him that Luke says "there 
appeared unto him an angel from heaven, strength- 
ening him." The threefold record of the evangelists 
conveys the idea of the intensest physical pain. As 
the wire carries the electric current, so every nerve 
in Jesus' physical being felt the anguish of His sen- 
sitive soul as He took upon Himself the burden of 
the world's sin and moral evil. 

The crisis of Jesus' career as Messiah and Re- 
deemer came in Gethsemane. The moral issue of 

His atoning work was intelligently 

2. Mental and voluntarily met here. The Gospels 

exhaust language in attempting to 
portray the stress and struggle of this conflict. 
"My soul is exceeding sorrowful even unto death." 
"Being in an agony he prayed more earnestly, 
sajdng. Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass 
away from me." The mental clearness of Christ's 
vision of humanity's moral gmlt and the energy 
of will necessary to meet the issue and take "this 
cup" of being the world's sin-bearer, indicate the 
awful sorrow and anguish of His supernatural con- 
flict. It is divinely significant that the word 
"agony" appears but once in all Scripture. This 
solitary word records a solitary experience. Only 
One ever compassed the whole range of the world's 
sorrow and pain, anguish and agony. The shame 
of criminal arrest in the garden and of subsequent 
condemnation and death as a malefactor had to 
His innocent soul the horror of humanity's entire 
and ageless guilt. The mental and moral anguish 
of Jesus in Gethsemane interprets the meaning of 
Paul's description of the atonement, "Him who knew 
no sin he made to be sin on our behalf" (2 Cor 6 21). 
The agony of Jesus was supremely within the 
realm of His spirit. The effect of sin in separating 

the human soul from God was fath- 

3. Spiritual omed by the suffering Saviour in the 

fathomless mystery of His super- 
natural sorrow. Undoubtedly the anguish of 
Gethsemane surpassed the physical torture of 
Calvary. The whole conflict was wrought out here, 
Jesus' filial spirit, under the burden of the world's 
guilt, felt isolated from the Father. This awful, 
momentary seclusion from His Father's face con- 
stituted the "cup" which He prayed might pass from 
Him, and the "agony" of soul, experienced again 
on the cross, when He felt that God had forsaken 

No theory of the atonement can do justice to 
the threefold anguish of Jesus in Gethsemane and 
on Calvary, or to the entire trend of Scripture, that 
does not include the substitutionary element in 
His voluntary sacrifice, as stated by the prophet: 
"Jeh hath laid on him the iniquity of us all," Isa 
63 6; and by His apostles: "who was delivered up 
for our trespasses, Rom 4 25; "who his own self 
bare our sins," 1 Pet 2 24. 

The word "agony" also occurs in 2 Mace 3 
14.16.21 AV ( RV "distress") in describing the dis- 
tress of the people at the attempt of Heliodorus to 
despoil the treasury of the temple in the days of 
Onias. D wight M. Pratt 

AGRAPHA, ag'ra-fa ("A7po(j)tt, dgrapha): The 
word dgraphos of which agrapha is the neuter 

plur. is met with in classical Gr and in Gr papyri 

in its primary sense of "unwritten," "unrecorded." 

In early Christian lit., esp. in the 

1. The writings of Clement of Alexandria, it 
Term and was used of oral tradition; and in 
Its History this sense it was revived by Koemer 

in a Leipzig Program issued in 1776 
under the title De sermonibus Christi agraphois. 
For some time it was restricted to sayings of Christ 
not recorded in the Gospels and believed to have 
reached the sources in which they are found by means 
of oral tradition. As however graphi, the noun 
with which agrapha is connected, can have not only 
the general meaning "writing, but the special 
meaning "Scripture," the adj. could signify not 
only "oral" but also "uncanonical" or "non- 
canonical"; and it was employed by Resch in the 
latter sense in the 1st ed of his great work on the 
subject which appeared in German in 1889 under the 
title, Agrapha: Extra-canonical Gospel Fragments. 
The term was now also extended so as to include 
narratives as well as sayings. In the second ed 
(also in German) it is further widened so as to em- 
brace all extra-canonical sayings or passages con- 
nected with the Bible. The new title runs: Agra- 
pha: Extrarcanonical Fragments of Scripture; and the 
volume contains a first collection of OT agrapha. 
The term is still however used most frequently of 
non-canonical sayings ascribed to Jesus, and to the 
consideration of these this art. will mainly be de- 

Of the 361 agrapha and apocrypha given by Resch 
about 160 are directly ascribed to Christ. About 30 

others can be added from Christian and 

2. Extent of Jewish sources and about 80 sayings 
Material found in Muhammadan hterature {Ex- 
pos T, V, 59, 107, 177 f, 503 f, 561, 

etc). The last-mentioned group, although not 
entirely without interest, may largely be disre- 
garded as it is highly improbable that it represents 
early tradition. The others come from a variety 
of soxttces: the NT outside of the Gospels, Gospel 
MSS and VSS, Apocryphal Gospels and an early 
collection of sayings of Jesus, hturgical texts, 
patristic and mediaeval Ut. and the Talm. 

Many of these sayings have no claim to be regarded 

as independent agrapha. At least five classes come 

under this category. (1) Some are 

3. Sayings mere parallels or variants, for in- 
to Be stance: "Pray and be not weary," 
Excluded which is evidently connected with 

Lk 18 1; and the saying in the Talm: 
"I, the Gospel, did not come to take away from the 
law of Moses but to add to the law of Moses have I 
come" (Shab 1166) which is clearly a variant of 
Mt 5 l7. (2) Some sayings are made up of two or 
more canonical texts. "I chose you before the 
world was," for example, is a combination of 
Jn 15 19 and Eph 1 4; and "Abide in my love 
and I will give you eternal life" of Jn 8 31 and 
10 28. (3) Misquotation or loose quotation ac- 
counts for a number of alleged agrapha. "Sodom 
is justified more than thou" seems to be really from 
Ezk 16 53 and its context. "Let not the sun go 
down upon your wrath" is of apostolic not evan- 
gelic origin (Eph 4 26). "Anger destroys even 
the prudent" comes from LXX of Prov 15 1. 

(4) Some sayings must be rejected because they 
cannot be traced to an early source, for instance, 
the fine saying: "Be brave in war, and fight with 
the old serpent, and ye shall receive eternal life," 
which is first met with in a text of the 12th cent. 

(5) Several sayings are suspicious by reason of their 
source or their character. _ The reference to "my 
mother the Holy Spirit," in one of them, has no 
warrant in the acknowledged teaching of Christ 
and comes from a source of uncertain value, the 




Gospel according to the He. Pantheistic sayings 
such as "I am thou and thou art I, and wherever 
thou art I am"; "You are I and I am you"; and 
perhaps the famous saying: "Raise the stone and 
thou wilt find me; cleave the wood and there am 
I," as well as the sayings reported by Epiphanius 
from the Gospel of the Ebionites seem to breathe 
an atmosphere different from that of the canonical 

When all the sajdngs belonging to these five 
classes, and a few others of liturgical origin, have 
been deducted there remain about 
4. Sayings thirty-five which are worthy of men- 
in NT tion and in some cases of careful con- 

sideration. Some are dealt with in 
the art. Logia (q.v.). The others, which are given 
here, are numbered consecutively to facilitate 
reference. The best authenticated are of course 
those found in the NT outside of the Gospels. 
These are (1) the great saying cited by Paul at 
Miletus: "It is more blessed to give than to receive" 
(Acts 20 35) ; (2) the words used in the institution 
of the Eucharist preserved only in 1 Cor 11 24 f; 
(3) the promise of the baptism of the Spirit (Acts 
1 5 and 11 16) ; and (4) the answer to the question: 
"Dost thou at this time restore the kingdom to 
Israel?" (Acts 1 7f). Less certain are (5) the 
description of the Second Advent, said to be "by 
the word of the Lord" (1 Thess 4 15 ff) ; and 
(6) the promise of the crown of life to them that 
love God (Jas 1 12). 

Of considerable interest are someadditions, in MSS 
of the Gospels and VSS. One of the most remark- 
able (7) is the comment of Jesus on a 
6. Sayings man's working on the Sabbath day 
in MSS inserted after Lk 6 4 in Codex D and 
and VSS the Freer MS recently discovered in 
Egypt: "If thou knowest what thou 
doest, O man, blessed art thou, but if thou knowest 
not, thou art accursed and a transgressor of the 
law." Another (8) also found in D and in several 
other authorities is appended to Mt 20 28: "But 
ye seek ye from httle to increase and from greater 
to be less." In the Curetonian Syriac the latter 
clause runs: "and not from greater to be less." 
The new saying is noteworthy but obscure. A 
third passage (9) of less value but still of interest 
is an insertion in the longer ending of Mk, between 
ver 14 and ver 15, which was referred to by Jerome 
as present in codices in his day but has now been 
met with in Gr for the first time in the above- 
mentioned Freer MS. (For facsimile see Am. 
Journal of Archaeology, 1908.) In reply to a com- 
plaint of the disciples about the opposition of 
Satan and their request: "Therefore reveal thy 
righteousness even now," Jesus is reported to have 
said: "The limit of the years of the authority of 
Satan is fulfilled, but other dreadful things are 
approaching, and in behalf of those who had sinned 
was I delivered unto death in order that they might 
return to the truth and might sin no longer, that 
they might inherit the spiritual and incorruptible 
glory of righteousness in heaven." This alleged 
utterance of the risen Lord is most probably of 
secondary character (cf Gregory, Das Freer Lo- 
gion; Swete, Two New Gospel Fragments). 

Apocryphal and patristic literature supplies some 
notable sayings. The first place must be given 
(10) to the great saying which in its 
6. Sayings shortest form consists of only three 
from the words: "Be ["become," "show your- 
Fathers, selves to be"] approved money- 
etc changers." Resch (Agrapha^, no. 87) 

gives 69 references, at least 19 of 
which date from the 2d and 3d cents., although 
they represent only a few authorities, all Egyptian. 
The saying seems to have circulated widely in 

the early church and may be genuine. Other 
early sayings of interest or value, from these sources, 
must be given without comment. (11) "The 
heavenly Father willeth the repentance of the sin- 
ner rather than his punishment" (Justin Martyr). 
(12) "That which is weak shall be saved by that 
which is strong" (ck 300 AD). (13) "Come out 
from bonds ye who will" (Clement of Alexandria). 
(14). "Be thou saved and thy soul" (Theodotus in 
id). (15) "Blessed are they who mourn for the 
perdition of unbeUevers" {Didaskalia). (16) "He 
who is near me is near the fire; he who is far from 
me is far from the kingdom" (Origen). (17) "He 
who has not been tempted has not been approved" 
{Didaskalia, etc). (18) He who makes sad a 
brother's spirit is one of the greatest of criminals" 
(Ev Heb). (19) "Never be glad except when ye 
have seen your brother in love" (ib). (20) "Let not 
him who seeks cease .... until he find, and when 
he finds he shall be astonished; astonished he shall 
reach the kingdom, and when he has reached the 
kingdom he shall rest" (Clement of Alexandria and 
Logia of Oxyrhynchua). (21) In a fragment of a 
Gospel found by Grenfell and Hunt at Oxyrhynchus 
(0 Papyri no. 655) is the following non-canonical 
passage in a canonical context: "He Himself will 
give you clothing. His disciples say unto Him: 
When wilt thou be manifest to us and when shall we 
see thee? He saith: When ye shall be stripped 
and not be ashamed." The saying or apocryphon 
exhibits considerable Kkeness to a saying cited by 
Clement of Alexandria from the Gospel according 
to the Egyptians, but the difference is great enough 
to make original identity doubtful. Another frag- 
ment found by the same explorers on the same site 
(0 Papyri no. 840) preserves two agrapha or apoc- 
rypha which though clearly secondary are very 
curious. The first (22) is the concluding portion of 
a saying about the punishment of evil-doers: "Be- 
fore a man does wrong he makes all manner of subtle 
excuses. But give heed lest you also suffer the same 
things as they for the evil-doers among men receive 
not their due among the living (Gr zdis) only 
but also await punishment and much torment." 
Professor Swete (Two New Gospel Fragments), 
accents zoois as the plural of zoon and thus finds 
a contrast between the fate of animals and that of 
human beings. The second sajdng (23) is a rather 
lengthy reply to the complaint of a Pharisaic 
stickler for outward purity. The most interesting 
part of it as edited by Swete runs as follows: "Woe 

to you blind who see not But I and my 

disciples who thou sayest have not been dipped 
have dipped in the waters of eternal life which 
come down from God out of heaven." All these 
texts from Oxyrhynchus probably date from the 
2d cent. Other Egypt sources, the so-called Coptic 
Apocryphal Gospels {Texts and Studies Caxah. 
IV, 2, 1896), contain several sayings which are 
of interest as coming from the same religious 
environment. The following three are the most 
remarkable. (24) "Repent, for it is better that a 
man find a cup of water in the age that is coming 
than all the riches of this world" (130). (25) 
"Better is a single footstep in My Father's house 
than all the wealth of this world" (130 f). (26) 
"Now therefore have faith in the love of My 
Father; for faith is the end of all things" (176). 
As in the case of the Logia these sayings are found 
in association with canonical sayings and parallels. 
Since the Logia may well have numbered scores, 
if not hundreds, it is at least possible that these 
Coptic sayings may have been taken from the 
missing portions of this collection, or a recension 
of it, and therefore they are not unworthy of 
notice as conceivably early agrapha. To these 
sasdngs of Christian derivation may be added 

Agrarian Laws 



(27) one Muhammadan saying, that inscribed in 
Arabic on the chief gateway of the city Futtey- 
pore Sikri built by Akbar: "The world is but a 
bridge, over which you must pass, but must not 
hnger to build your dwelling" {In the Himalayas 
by Miss Gordon Cumming, cited by Griffenhoofe, 
The Unwritten Sayings of Christ, 128). 

Although the number of agrapha purporting to 

be sayings of Jesus which have been collected by 

scholars seems at first sight imposing, 

7. Result those which have anything like a 

strong claim to acceptance on the 
ground of early and reliable source and internal 
character are disappointingly few. Of those given 
above nos. 1— i, 7, 8, 10 which have mostly early 
attestation clearly take precedence of the rest. 
Nos. 11-20 are early enough and good enough to 
merit respectful consideration. Still the propor- 
tion of genuine, or possibly genuine, material is 
very small. Ropes is probably not far from the 
truth when he remarks that "the writers of the 
Synoptic Gospels did their work so well that only 
stray bits here and there, and these but of small 
value, were left for the gleaners." On the other 
hand it is not necessary to follow Wellhausen in 
rejecting the agrapha in toto. Recent discoveries 
have shown that they are the remains of a con- 
siderable body of extra-canonical sayings which 
circulated more or less in Christian circles, esp. in 
Egypt, in the early cents., and the possible presence 
in what we possess of a sentence or two actually 
spoken by Jesus fully justifies research. 

The second edition of the work of Resch includes 

17 agrapha from MSS of Acts and 1 Jn most of 

which are from Codex D, 31 apostolic 

8. Other apocrypha, and 66 agrapha and apoc- 
Agrapha rypha connected with the OT. 19 of 

the latter are largely taken from pseu- 
depigrapha, a pseudo-Ezekiel for instance. These 
agrapha some of which are really textual variants 
are of inferior interest and value. 

Literature. — The chief authorities are the German 
book of the American scholar J. H. Ropes, Die Spriiche 
Jesu, die in den kanonischen Evangelien nicht iiberliefert 
sind, and his art. "Agrapha" in HDB (extra vol); and 
the often-mentioned worlc of Resch. The former has 
great critical value, and the latter, especially in the 
2d ed, is a veritable thesaui'us of material. For a full 
survey of the literature up to 1905 see that work, pp. 
14-17. There is much criticism in Bauer's Das Leben 
Jesu im Zeitalter der neutestamentlichen Apokryphen, ch 
vii. Among smaller works special mention may be made 
of Prebendary Blomfield's Twenty-Five Agrapha (1900); 
and the book of Griffenhoofe, the title of which is given 
above. There are recent arts, on the subject in HDB 
(1909), "Unwritten Sayings," and DCG, "Sayings (Un- 
written)"; Am. Journal of Archaeology, XII (1908), 49— 
55; H. A. Sanders, New MSS from Egypt; also ib, XIII 
(1909), 130. See Logia. 

William Taylor Smith 
AGRARIAN LAWS, a-gra'ri-an loz : 

1. The Sabbath Year 

2. The Jubilee 

3. Its Object 

4. The Legal Rules 

5. Ideas and Circumstances of the Legislation 

6. Form of the Legislation 

7. Its Operation and Extension 

8. Other Laws Affecting the Land 

The Mosaic provisions on this subject form one 
of the most characteristic and interesting portions 
of the legislation. The main institutions are two, 
viz., the Sabbath year and the jubilee, and they are 
closely linked together. 

In every seventh year the land was to lie fal- 
low "that the poor of thy people may eat: and 
what they leave the beast of the field 
1. The shall eat" (Ex 23 10 f; cf Lev 25 2-7). 

Sabbath 'And the Sabbath of the land shall 
Year be for food for you; for thee, and for 

thy servant, and for thy maid, and 
for thy hired servant and for thy stranger that 
sojourn with thee; but for thy cattle, and for the 

beasts that are in thy land, shall all the increase 
thereof be for food' (Lev 25 6f). This has been 
quoted at length because the rendering of EV is 
misleading. "The Sabbath of the land" does not 
mean that the natural increase thereof is to be 
eaten by the IsraeUtish peasant. That interpre- 
tation is excluded by vs 3-5.20-22. What is 
intended is clearly shown by the latter of these two 
passages, "I will command my blessing upon you 
in the sixth year." The principle on which the 
manna had been provided for Sabbaths was to 
apply to the harvest of the sixth year, and this is 
the import of the phrase. 

After "seven sabbaths of years, even forty and 

nine years" a trumpet was to be blown throughout 

the land on the tenth day of the 

2. The seventh month (i.e. the Day of Atone- 
Jubilee ment) and the fiftieth year was to be 

hallowed and celebrated as a "jubilee." 
No agricultural work of any kind was to be 
performed, but "ye may [so correct EW] eat the 
increase thereof out of the field" (Lev 26 12). 
God would so bless the land in the sixth year that 
it would bring forth enough for the Sabbath year, 
the ensuing jubilee and the subsequent period to the 
harvest of the ninth year (vs 20-22) . 

In addition to being a period in which the land 

was left fallow, the jubilee was intended to meet 

the economic evils that befell peasants 

3. Its in ancient societies. Wars or unfa- 
Object vorable seasons would soon reduce a 

farmer to a condition in which he 
would have to borrow. But money is rarely to 
be had without interest and security, and in early 
communities the rates of interest were very high 
indeed, while the only security the farmer could 
offer would consist of his land and the persons of 
himself and his children. Hence we find insol- 
vency giving rise to the ahenation of land and to 
slavery all over the world — sometimes with the 
retention of civil rights (as in Rome and Israel), 
at others in a more unalloyed form. The jubilee 
aims at both these evils. It is provided that in 
that year the peasants who had lost their full 
freedom through insolvency should be free (see 
SBL, 5 ff) and all lands that had been sold should 
return to the original owner or his family. "And 
the land shall not be sold in perpetuity; for the 
land is mine: for ye are strangers and sojourners 
with me" (ver 23). To this theory there are 
parallels elsewhere, e.g. in Togoland (Heinrici, 
Zeiischrift fiir vergleichende Rechtswissenschaft, XI, 

Lev 25 containing the land laws gives effect to 

this view by enacting that when an Israelite was 

compelled to part with his land there 

4. The was to be a "redemption" of land, and 
Legal Rules that in default of redemption the land 

should return to its original owner in 
the jubilee year. This "redemption" covers two 
ideas — a right of preemption by the next of kin 
in the first instance, and if that were not exercised, 
a right on the part of the original owner to buy 
back the land before the jubilee (vs 24-28). The 
theory did not apply to houses in walled cities. 
Those might be redeemed within a year of sale: 
in default the property passed for ever and was un- 
affected by the jubilee (vs 29 f). Villages were 
reckoned as country (ver 31). The Levitical 
cities were subject to the rules of land, not of 
walled cities (vs 32 f ; read with the Vulg in ARVm, 
"if they have not been redeemed" in vs 32), and 
their fields were not to be sold (ver 34). All sales 
of lands to which the jubilee applied were to be 
made on the basis of the number of crops (vs 14 ff) ; 
in fact, what was sold was not the property itself 
but the usufruct (i.e. the right of using, reaping, 



Agrarian Laws 

etc) till the year of the jubilee. Similarly with the 
laws of Lev 27 16-25, where the general principle 
is that if a field be sanctified the value shall be esti- 
mated according to the number of years to the 
jubilee. Unfortunately the text is corrupt and it 
is impossible to make out the exact circumstances 
in which no further redemption was allowed 
(ver 20). 

"The land laws are the product of many inde- 
pendent ideas and circumstances First such 

a system as that expounded in the 25th 
6. Ideas chapter of Lev could only be put for- 
and Cir- ward by one who had to work on what 
cumstances is so very rare in history— a clean slate. 
of the In other words, the system of land 
Legislation tenure here laid down could only be 
introduced in this way by men who had 
no preexisting system to reckon with. Secondly, 
there is {mutatis mutandis) a marked resemblance 
between the provisions of Lev and the system intro- 
duced in Egypt by Joseph (Gen 47). The land 
is the Lord's as it is Pharaoh's; but the towns 
which are built on that land are not subject to the 
same theory or the same rules. Perhaps the ex- 
planation is that Joseph's measures had affected 
only those who gained their living by agriculture, 
i.e. the dwellers in the country. Thirdly, the 
system shows the enormous power that the con- 
ception of family soUdarity possessed in the Mo- 
saic age And fourthly, the enactment is 

inspired and illuminated by the humanitarian and 
religious convictions to which reference has already 
been made" (Journal of Transactions of the Victoria 
Institute, XLI, 160). Undoubtedly the most strik- 
ing feature of the enactment is to be found in these 
religious convictions with the absolute reliance on 
constant Divine intervention to secure the working 
of the law (vs 20 ff). 

Lev 26 shows clearly that this legislation was 

conceived as the terms of a covenant made between 

God and the children of Israel, and it 

6. Fonn appears from vs 42-45 that this 
of the covenant was regarded as being con- 
Legislation nected with the covenants with the 

patriarchs though it is also a covenant 
made with the generation that came forth from 
Egypt. The land was originally promised to Abra- 
ham in a covenant (Gen 17) and it would seem 
that these laws are regarded as attaching to that 
covenant which had been renewed with his de- 
scendants. Indeed the laws appear to be presented 
as terms of the sworn agreement (covenant) under 
which God was about to give Israel the possession 
of Canaan. 

As respects the operation of these laws we have 

no information as to the observance of any fallow 

years before the Exile: 2 Ch 36 21 

7. Its Oper- is rather unfavorable, but so obviously 
ation and echoes Lev 26 43 that it scarcely 
Extension seems to be meant as a historical state- 
ment. But traces are to be found 

of the operation of other parts of the system. 
Ruth 4 shows us the law of redemption working, 
but with two notable extensions. Widows have 
acquired a right of property in their husbands' 
estates, and when the next of kin refuses to redeem, 
the right passes to the kinsman who is nearest in 
succession. Neither of these cases is contemplated 
by the Pent: both appear to be fresh applications 
of the Levitical law which, like"ftll other legislations, 
had to be adapted to meet new sets of facts as they 
arose. Similarly Jer 32 illustrates the law of pre- 
emption, but here a small difficulty arises, for Lev 
25 34 forbids the sale of the suburbs of the Levitical 
cities. Probably however this refers only to sale 
outside the family and not as here to the nearest 
kinsman and heir presumptive. Similarly Ezk 

twice refers to the jubilee (7 12 f and 46 17) in 
terms that seem to show that he knew it as an 
existing institution (see SBL, 96; Churchman, May, 
1906, 292). Historical traces of the Levitical cities 
are mentioned in the art. Levitical Cities. It 
should be added that under the monarchy a rule 
seems to have been introduced that derelict lands 
fell to the king (see 2 S 9 9 f ; 1 K 21 16; 2 K 8 

In later times there are several references to the 
fallow of the Sabbatical year (1 Maco 6 49.53; Ant, 
XIII, viii, 1; XIV, X, 6, etc). 

In addition to these laws Moses enacted pro- 
visions favoring gleaning, on which see Poor. 
He also prohibited sowing a field or 
8. Other vineyard with two kinds of seed (Lev 
Laws 19 19; Dt 22 9) and prescribed that 

Affecting for three years the fruit of trees should 
the Land not be eaten, while in the fourth it 
should be holy, and in the fifth it was 
to be available for ordinary purposes (Lev 19 23 ff). 
Harold M. Wiener 

AGREE, a-gre' (<rv|i<|><ov4<«, sumphoneo, "to be 
of the same mind," "to come to a mutual under- 
standing") : This is the sense of the word in Mt 20 
2; Jn 9 22, and other passages. In Mk 14 56 
the word is isos and has the thought not only that 
their words did not agree, but also that the testi- 
mony was not in agreement with or equal to what 
the law required in such a case. The thought of 
being equal occurs also in 1 Jn 5 8. 

The fig. use of the word in Mt 18 19 makes it 
of special interest. The word there is sumpho- 
neo, from which comes our word symphony, mean- 
ing a harmonious blending. This agreement there- 
fore is complete. Three persons are introduced: 
two human beings and the Father. They are in 
perfect agreement on the subject or purpose under 
consideration. It is therefore an inward unity 
produced by the Holy Spirit, leading the two into 
such an agreement with the Father. There will 
follow then, as a matter of course, what is promised 
in vs 19.20. In Acts 5 9 it sets forth the justice 
of Peter in dealing in the same manner in both cases. 
Ananias and Sapphira were in perfect agreement 
and equally guilty (Lk 5 36; Acts 15 15). 

Jacob W. Kapp 

AGRICULTURE, ag'ri-kul-tftr, ag'ri-kul-chur: 

I. Development of Agriculture 
II. Climatic Conditions and Fertility 
III. Agricultural Pursuits 

1. Growing of Grain 

(1) Plowing and Sowing 

(2) Reaping 

(3) Threshing 

2. Care ol Vineyards 

3. Raising of Flocks 

/. Development of Agriculture. — One may witness 
in Syria and Pal today the various stages of social 
progress through which the people of Bible times 
passed in which the development of their agricul- 
ture played an important part. To the E. the sons 

_, Pole or Beam, b, Yokes, c, Share, d. Handle. 
e, Points. Ox-goad (below). 

of Ishmael still wander in tribes from place to place, 
depending upon their animals for food and raiment, 
unless by a raid they can secure the fruits of the 




soil from the peoples, mostly of their own blood, 
who have given up wandering and are supporting 
themselves by tilling the ground. It is only a short 
step from this frontier life to the more protected 
territory toward the Mediterranean, where in 
comparatively peaceful surroundings, the wander- 
ers become stationary. If the land which they 
have come to possess is barren and waterless, they 
become impoverished physically and spiritually, 
but if they have chosen the rarer spots where under- 
ground streams burst forth into valleys covered 
with alluvial deposits (Ex 3 8), they prosper and 
there springs up the more complicated community 
life with its servants, hirelings, gardeners, etc. A 
division of labor ensues. Some leave the soil for 
the crafts and professions but still depend upon 
their farmer neighbors for their sustenance. (1 K 
5 11.) Such was the variety of life of the people 
among whom Jesus lived, and of their ancestors, 
and of the inhabitants of the land long before the 
children of Israel came to take possession of it. 
Bible history deals with the Hebrews at a period 
when a large proportion of that people were en- 
gaged in agrarian pursuits, hence we find its pages 
filled with references to agricultural occupations. 

//. Climatic Conditions and Fertility. — With cli- 
matic conditions and fertility so varied, the mode 
of cultivation, seedtime and harvest differed even 
in closely adjacent territory. On the coastal plains 
and in the low Jordan valley the soil was usually 
rich and the season was early, whereas in the moun- 
tainous regions and high interior plains the planting 
and reaping times were from two weeks to a month 
later. To make use of the soil on the hillsides, 
terracing was frequently necessary. Examples 
of these old terraces still exist. On the unwatered 
plains the crops could be grown only in the winter 
and spring, i.e. during the rainy Season. These 
districts dried up in May or June and remained 
fallow during the rainless summer. The same 
was true of the hilly regions and valleys except 
where water from a stream could be diverted from 
its channel and spread over the fields. In such 
districts crops could be grown irrespective of the 
seasons. See Irrigation. 

///. Agricultural Pursuits. — To appreciate the 
many references in the Bible to agricultural pur- 
suits and the frequent allusions of Our Lord to the 
fields and their products, we must remember how 

Primitive Plowing. 

different were the surroundings of the farmers of 
that day from those among which most of us live 
or with which we are acquainted. What knowl- 
edge we have of these pursuits is drawn from such 
references as disclose methods bearing a close 
similarity to those of the present day. The strong 

tendency to resist change which is everywhere 
manifest throughout the country and the survival 
of ancient descriptive words in the language of 
today further cortBrm our beUef that we now wit- 
ness in this country the identical operations which 
were used two thousand or more years ago. It 
would be strange if there were not a variety of 
ways by which the same object was accomplished 
when we remember that the Heb people benefited 
by the experience of the Egyptians, of the Baby- 
lonians, of the inhabitants of the land of their 
adoption, as well as of its late European conquerors. 
For this reason the drawings found on the Egyp 
monuments, depicting agricultural scenes, help us to 
explain the probable methods used in Pal. 

Three branches of agriculture were more promi- 
nent than the others; the growing of grain, the 
care of vineyards (Nu 18 30), and the raising of 
flocks. Most households owned fields and vine- 
yards and the richer added to these a wealth of 
flocks. The description of Job's wealth (in Job 1) 
shows that he was engaged in all these pursuits. 

ThresMng Instrument witli Sharp Teeth. 

Hezekiah's riches as enumerated in 2 Ch 32 27.28 
suggest activity in each of these branches. 

In this and following descriptions, present-day 
methods as far as they correspond to ancient 

records will be dealt with. 
1. Growing (1) Plowing and sowing. — On the 
of Grain plains, little or no preparation for 
plowing is needed, but in the hilly 
regions, the larger stones, which the tilling of the 
previous season has loosened and which the winter's 
rains have washed bare, are picked out and piled 
into heaps on some ledge, or are thrown into the 
paths, which thus become elevated above the fields 
which they traverse. (See Field.) If grain is to 
be planted, the seed is scattered broadcast by the 
sower. If the land has not been used for some time 
the ground is first plowed, and when the seed has 
been scattered is plowed again. The sower may 
keep his supply of seed in a pocket made by pulling 
up his outer garment through his girdle to a suffi- 
cient extent for it to sag down outside his girdle 
in the form of a loose pouch. He may, on the 
other hand, carry it in a jar or basket as the sowers 
are pictured as doing on the Egyp monuments. 
As soon as the seed is scattered it is plowed in 
before the ever-present crows and ravens can 
gather it up. The path of the plow in the fields 
of the hilly regions is a tortuous one because of the 
boulders jutting out here and there (Mt 13 3 fl) 
or because of the ledges which frequently lie hidden 
just beneath the surface (the rocky places of 
Christ's parable). When the plowman respects 
the footpaths which the sufferance of the owner 
has allowed to be trodden across his fields or which 
mark the boundaries between the lands of different 
owners, and leaves them unplowed, then the seed 
which has fallen on these portions becomes the 
food of the birds. Corners of the field where the 
plow cannot reach are hoed by hand. Harrowing-in 
as we know it is not practised today, except on 
some of the larger plains, and probably was not 
used in Pal in earlier times. (See Harrow.) 

(2) Reaping. — After the plowing is over, the 




fields are deserted until after the winter rains, unless 
an unusually severe storm of rain and hail (Ex 9 25) 
has destroyed the young shoots. Then a second 
sowing is made. In April, if the hot east winds 
have not blasted the grain (see Blasting) the bar- 
ley begins to ripen. The wheat follows from a 
week to six weeks later, depending upon the alti- 
tude. Toward the end of May or the first week 
in June, which marks the beginning of the dry 
season, reaping begins. Whole famiUes move out 
from their village homes to spend the time in the 
fields until the harvest is over. Men and women 
join in the work of cutting the grain. A handful 
of grain is gathered together by means of a sickle 
held in the right hand. The stalks thus gathered 
in a bunch are then grasped by the left hand and 
at the same time a pull is given which cuts off some 
of the stalks a few inches above the ground (see 

a drag, the bottom of which is studded with pieces 
of basaltic stone. This drag, on which the driver, 
and perhaps his family, sits or stands, is driven in a 
circular path over the grain. In still other dis- 
tricts an instrument resembhng a wheel harrow is 
used, the antiquity of which is confirmed by the 
Egyp records. The supply of unthreshed grain is 
kept in the center of the floor. Some of this is 
pulled down from time to time into the path of the 
animals. All the while the partly threshed grain 
is being turned over with a fork. The stalks 
gradually become broken into short pieces and the 
husks about the grain are torn off. This mixture 
of chaff and grain must now be winnowed. This 
is done by tossing it into the air so that the wind 
may blow away the chaff (see Winnowing). When 
the chaff is gone then the grain is tossed in a wooden 
tray to separate from it the stones and lumps of 

Theiebhing with Oxen. 

Stubble) and pulls the rest up by the roots. These 
handfuls are laid behind the reapers and are gathered 
up by the helpers (see Gleaning), usually the chil- 
dren, and made into piles for transporting to the 

(3) Threshing.— The threshing-floors are con- 
structed in the fields, preferably in an exposed posi- 
tion in order to get the full benefit of the winds. 
If there is danger of marauders they are clustered 
together close to the village. The floor is a level, 
circular area 25 to 40 ft. in diameter, prepared by 
first picking out the stones, and then wetting the 
ground, tamping or rolling it, and finally sweeping 
it. A border of stones usually surrounds the floor 
to keep in the grain. The sheaves of grain which 
have been brought on the backs of men, donkeys, 
camels, or oxen, are heaped on this area, and the 
process of tramping out begins. In some localities 
several animals, commonly oxen or donkeys, are 
tied abreast and driven round and round the floor. 
In other places two oxen are yoked together to 

soil which clung to the roots when the grain was 
reaped. The difference in weight between the 
stones and grain makes separation by this process 
possible (see Sifted). The grain is now piled in 
heaps and in many localities is also sealed. This 
process consists in pressing a large wooden seal 
against the pile. When the instrument is removed 
it leaves an impression which would be destroyed 
should any of the grain be taken away. This 
allows the government officials to keep accoimt of 
the tithes and enables the owner to detect any 
theft of grain. Until the wheat is transferred to 
bags some one sleeps by the piles on the threshing- 
floor. If the wheat is to be stored for home con- 
sumption it is often first washed with water and 
spread out on goats' hair mats to dry before it is 
stored in the wall compartments found in every 
house (see Storehouse). Formerly the wheat was 
ground only as needed. This was then a household 
task which was accomphshed with the hand-mill or 
mortar (see Mill). 




No clearer picture to correspond with present- 
day practice in vine culture (see Vine) in Pal could 
be given than that mentioned in Isa 

2. Care of 5 1.6. Grapes probably served an 
Vineyards important part in the diet of Bible 

times as they do at present. In the 
season which begins in July and extends for at least 
three months, the humblest peasant as well as the 
richest landlord considers grapes as a necessary 
part of at least one meal each day. The grapes 
were not only eaten fresh but were made into wine 
(see Winepress). No parallel however can be 
found in the Bible for the molasses which is made 
by boiling down the _ fresh grape juice. Some 
writers believe that this substance was meant in 
some passages tr"* by wine or honey, but it is doubt- 
ful. The care of the vineyards fitted well into the 
farmer's routine, as most of the attention required 
could be given when the other crops demanded no 

The leaders of ancient Israel reckoned their 
flocks as a necessary part of their wealth (see 

Sheep Raising) . When a man's flocks 

3. Raising were his sole possession he often lived 
of Flocks with them and led them in and out in 

search of pasturage (Ps 23; Mt 18 
12), but a man with other interests delegated this 
task to his sons (1 S 16 11) or to hirehngs. Hu- 
man nature has not changed since the time when 
Christ made the distinction between the true shep- 
herd and the hireUng (Jn 10 12). Within a short 
time of the writing of these words the writer saw a 
hireling cursing and abusing the stray members of 
a flock which he was driving, not leading as do good 

The flock furnished both food and raiment. The 
milk of camels, sheep and goats was eaten fresh or 
made into curdled milk, butter or cheese. More 
rarely was the flesh of these animals eaten (see 
Food). The peasant's outer coat is still made of a 
tawed sheepskin or woven of goats' hair or wool 
(see Weaving). The various agricultural opera- 
tions are treated more fully under their respective 
names, (q.v.). Jambs A. Patch 

AGRIPPA, a-grip'a. See Heeod. 

AGUE, a'gu (rin"ip5, kaddahath): In Lev 26 16 
AV is one of the diseases threatened as a penalty 
for disobedience to the law. The malady is said 
to "consume the eyes, and make the soul to pine 
away." The word means burning (Vulg "ardor") 
and was probably intended to denote the malarial 
fever so common now both in the Shephelah and in 
the Jordan valley. In LXX the word used (fxTepos, 
ikteros) means jaundice, which often accompanies 
this fever. RV translates it "fever." See Fever. 

AGUR, a'gur ('^15^5 , 'dghur, seeming, from com- 
parison with Arab, roots, to mean either "hireling," 
or "collector," "gatherer") : One of the contribu- 
tors to Prov; his words being included in 30. He 
takes an agnostic attitude toward God and tran- 
scendent things, and in general the range of his 
thought, as compared with that of other authors, 
is pedestrian. He shows, however, a tender rever- 
ence and awe. His most notable utterance, per- 
haps, is the celebrated Prayer of Agur (Prov 30 
7-9), which gives expression to a charming golden 
mean of practical ideal. His sayings are constructed 
on a rather artificial plan; having the form of the 
so-called numerical proverb. See under Proverbs, 
Book of, II, 6. John Franklin Genung 

AH, a, AHA, a-ha': Interjections of frequent 
occurrence in the OT, representing different Heb 
words and different states of feeling. (1) nnx , 

'ahdh, expressing complaint and found in the phrase 
"Ah, Lord Jeh" (Jer 16; 4 10 etc; Ezk 4 14 
etc). Elsewhere the word is tr"" "alas!" (Joel 1 
15). (2) nt? , 'ah, occurs once (Ezk 21 15), express- 
ing grief in contemplating Israel's destruction. 
(3) nsn , he'ah, usually expresses maUoious joy over 
the reverses of an enemy, and is introduced by the 
verb "to say" {BDB); so in Ps 35 21.25; Ezk 
25 3; 26 2; 36 2; in the repeated psalm 40 15, 
70 3. It expresses satiety in Isa 44 16; and repre- 
sents the neighing of a horse in Job 39 25. (4) 
■'in , hoy, expresses grief or pain, (Isa 1 4; Jer 22 
18). In 1 K 13 30 it is tr* "alas!" More fre- 
quently it is used to indicate that a threat of 
judgment is to follow (Isa 10 5; 29 1; or to direct 
attention to some important announcement (Isa 
55 1), where the Heb word is tr* "Ho." (5) 
Gr oid, oud, in Mk 15 29, used by those who 
mocked Jesus, as He hung upon the cross. All of 
these words are evidently imitative of the natural 
sounds, which spontaneously give expression to 
these emotions of complaint, grief, pain, exultation, 
etc. Edward Mack 

AH in proper names. See Ahi. 

AHAB, a'hab (SSnS, 'ah'abh; Assyr a-ha-ah-hu; 
LXX 'Axodp, Achakb, but Jer 29 21f,''AxioP, 
Achidb, which, in analogy with ^b^2''^^?, xSTKS), 
etc, indicates an original SXTIS , 'Shl'abh, meaning 
"the father is my brother"): The compound prob- 
ably signifies that "the father," referring to God, 
has been chosen as a brother. 

Ahab, son of Omri, the seventh king of Israel, 

who reigned for twenty-two years, from 876 to 854 

(1 K 16 28 ff), was one of the strongest 

1. Ahab's and at the same time one of the weakest 
Reign kings of Israel. With his kingdom he 

inherited also the traditional enemies 
of the kingdom, who were no less ready to make 
trouble for him than for his predecessors. Occupy- 
ing a critical position at the best, with foes ever 
ready to take advantage of any momentary weak- 
ness, the kingdom, during the reign of Ahab, was 
compelled to undergo the blighting effects of mis- 
fortune, drought and famine. But Ahab, equal to 
the occasion, was clever enough to win the admi- 
ration and respect of friend and foe, strengthening 
the Idngdom without and within. Many of the 
evils of his reign, which a stronger nature might 
have overcome, were incident to the measures that 
he took for strengthening the kingdom. 

In the days of David and Solomon a beneficial 
commercial intercourse existed between the He- 
brews and the Phoenicians. Ahab, 

2. His recognizing the advantages that would 
Foreign accrue to his kingdom from an alliance 
Policy with the foremost commercial nation 

of his time, renewed the old relations 
with the Phoenicians and cemented them by his 
marriage with Jezebel, daughter of Ethbaal, king of 
Tyre (the Ithobalos, priest of Astarte mentioned by 

He next turns his attention to the establishment 
of peaceful and friendly relations with the kindred 
and neighboring kingdom of Judah. For the first 
time since the division of the kingdoms the heredi- 
tary internecine quarrels are forgotten, "and 
Jehoshaphat," the good king of Judah, "made 
peace with the king of Israel." This alliance, too, 
was sealed by a marriage relationship, Jehoram, the 
crown-prince of Judah, being united in marriage 
with the princess Athaliah, daughter of Ahab. 

Perhaps some additional hght is thrown upon 
Ahab's foreign policy by his treatment of Benha- 
dad, king of Damascus. An opportunity was given 




to crush to dust the threatening power of Syria. 
But when Benhadad in the garb of a suppUant was 
compelled to sue for his Me, Ahab received him 
kindly as his brother, and although denounced by 
the prophets for his leniency, spared his enemy and 
allowed him to depart on the condition that he 
would restore the cities captured from Omri, and 
concede certain "streets" in Damascus as a quarter 
for Israelitish residents. No doubt Ahab thought 
that a king won as a friend by kindness might be of 
greater service to Israel than a hostile nation, made 
stUl more hostile by having its king put to death. 
Whatever Ahab's motives may have been, these 
hereditary foes really fought side by side against 
the common enemy, the king of Assyria, in the battle 
at Karkar on the Orontes in the year 854, as is 
proved by the inscription on the monolith of Shal- 
maneser II, king of Assyria. 

Ahab's far-sighted foreign policy was the antithe- 
sis of his short-sighted rehgious poUcy. Through 
his alhance with Phoenicia he not 

3. His only set in motion the currents of 
Religious commerce with Tyre, but invited 
Policy Phoen religion as well. The worship 

of Jeh by means of the golden calves of 
Jeroboam appeared antiquated to him. Baal, the 
god of Tyre, the proud mistress of the seas and the 
possessor of dazzling wealth, was to have an equal 
place with Jeh, the God of Israel. Accordingly he 
built in Samaria a temple to Baal and in it erected 
an altar to that god, and at the side of the altar a 
pole to Asherah (1 K 16 32.33). On the other 
hand he tried to serve Jeh by naming his children 
in his honor — ^Ahaziah ("Jeh holds"), Jehoram 
("Jeh is high"), and Athahah ("Jeh is strong"). 
However, Ahab failed to reahze that while a coali- 
tion of nations might be advantageous, a syncre- 
tism of their religions would be disastrous. He 
failed to apprehend the full meaning of the prin- 
ciple, "Jeh alone is the God of Israel." In Jezebel, 
his Phoen wife, Ahab found a champion of the 
foreign culture, who was as imperious and able 
as she was vindictive and unscrupulous. She was 
the patron of the prophets of Baal and of the devo- 
tees of Asherah (1 K 18 19.20; 19 1.2). At her 
instigation the altars of Jeh were torn down. She 
inaugurated the first great rehgious persecution 
of the church, killing off the prophets of Jeh with 
the sword. In all this she aimed at more than a 
syncretism of the two rehgions; she planned to 
destroy the religion of Jeh root and branch and put 
that of Baal in its place. In this Ahab did not 
oppose her, but is guilty of conniving at the poUcy 
of his unprincipled wife, if not of heartily con- 
curring in it. , • i i. 
Wrong religious principles have their counterpart 
in false ethical ideals and immoral civil acts. Ahab, 
as a worshipper of Baal, not only m- 

4. The troduced a false religion, but false 
Murder of social ideals as well. The royal resi- 
Naboth dence was in Jezreel, which had 

probably risen in importance through 
his alliance with Phoenicia. Close to the royal 
palace was a vineyard (1 K 21 1) owned by 
Naboth, a native of Jezreel. This piece of ground 
was coveted by Ahab for a vegetable garden. He 
demanded therefore that Naboth should sell it to 
him or exchange it for a better piece of land. Na- 
both declined the offer. Ahab, a Heb, knowing 
the laws of the land, was stung by the refusal and 
went home greatly displeased. Jezebel, however, 
had neither rehgious scruples nor any rega,rd for 
the civil laws of the Hebrews. Accordingly she 
planned a high-handed crime to gratify the whim 
of Ahab. In the name and by the authority of the 
king she had Naboth falsely accused of blasphemy 
against God and the king, and had him stoned to 

death by the local authorities. The horror created 
by this judicial murder probably did as much to 
finally overthrow the house of Omri as did the 
favor shown to the Tyrian Baal. 

Neither religious rights nor civil liberties can be 

trampled under foot without Divine retribution. 

The attempt to do so calls forth an 

5. Ahab awakened and quickened conscience, 
and Elijah imperatively demanding that the right 

be done. Like an accusing conscience, 
Elijah appeared before Ahab. His very name 
("my God is Jeh") inspired awe. "As Jeh, the 
God of Israel, hveth, before whom I stand, there 
shall not be dew nor rain these years," was the 
conscience-troubhng message left on the mind of 
Ahab for more than three years. On EUjah's 
reappearance, Ahab greets him as the troubler of 
Israel. Elijah calmly informs him that the king's 
religious policy has caused the trouble in Israel. 
The proof for it is to be furnished on Mount Carmel. 
Ahab does the bidding of Ehjah. The people shall 
know whom to serve. Baal is silent. Jeh answers 
with fire. A torrent of rain ends the drought. The 
victory belongs to Jeh. 

Once more Ehjah's indignation flashes against 
the house of Ahab. The judicial murder of Naboth 
calls it forth. The civil rights of the nation must 
be protected. Ahab has sold himself to do evil 
in the sight of Jeh. Therefore Ahab's house shall 
fall. Jezebel's carcase shall be eaten by dogs; 
the king's posterity shall be cut off; the dogs of 
the city or the fowls of the air shall eat their bodies 
(1 K 21 20-26). Like thunderbolts the words 
of Elijah strike home. Ahab "fasted, and lay in 
sackcloth, and went softly." But the die was cast. 
Jeh is vindicated. Never again, in the history of 
Israel can Baal, the inspirer of injustice, claim a 
place at the side of Jeh, the God of righteousness. 

In common with oriental monarchs, Ahab dis- 
played a taste for architecture, stimulated, no 
doubt, by Phoen influence. Large 

6. Ahab's building operations were undertaken 
BuUding in Samaria (1 K 16 32; 2 K 10 21). 
Operations Solomon had an ivory throne, but Ahab 

built for himself, in Jezreel, a palace 
adorned with woodwork and inlaid with ivory 
(1 K 21 1; 22 39). Perhaps Amos, one hundred 
years later, refers to the work of Ahab when he 
says, "The houses of ivory shall perish" (Am 3 16). 
In his day Hiel of Bethel undertook to rebuild 
Jericho, notwithstanding the curse of Joshua (1 K 
16 33.34). Many cities were built during his reign 
(1 K 22 39). 

Ahab was not only a splendor-loving monarch, 
but a great military leader as well. He no doubt 

began his military policy by fortifying 

7. Ahab's the cities of Israel (1 K 16 34; 22 39). 
Military Benhadad (the Dadidri of the Assyr 
Career annals; Hadadezer and Barhadad 

are Heb, Aram, and Arab, forms of 
the same name), the king of Syria, whose vassals 
the kings of Israel had been (1 K 15 19), promptly 
besieges Samaria, and sends Ahab an insulting mes- 
sage. Ahab replies, "Let not him that girdeth 
on his armor boast himself as he that putteth it 
off." At the advice of a prophet of Jeh, Ahab, 
with 7,000 men under 232 leaders, inflicts a crush- 
ing defeat upon Benhadad and his 32 feudal kings, 
who had resigned themselves to a drunken carousal 
(1 K 20-21). 

In the following year, the Syrian army, in spite 
of its overwhelming superiority, meets another 
defeat at the hands of Ahab in the valley, near 
Aphek. On condition that Benhadad restore all 
Israelitish territory and grant the Hebrews certain 
rights in Damascus, Ahab spares his life to the 
great indignation of the prophet (1 K 20 22 f). 




In the year 854, Ahab with 2,000 chariots and 
10,000 men, fights shoulder to shoulder with Ben- 
hadad against Shalmaneser II, Icing of Assyria. At 
Karkar, on the Orontes, Benhadad, with his allied 
forces, suffered an overwhelming defeat {COT, II, i, 
183 f). 

Perhaps Benhadad blamed Ahab for the defeat. 
At any rate he fails to keep his promise to Ahab 
(1 K 22 3; 20 34). Lured by false prophets, but 
against the dramatic warning of Micaiah, Ahab 
is led to take up the gauntlet against Syria once 
more. His friend, Jehoshaphat, king of Judah, joins 
him in the conflict. For the first time since the 
days of David all Israel and Judah stand united 
against the common foe. 

Possibly the warning of Micaiah gave Ahab a 

premonition that this would be his last fight. 

He enters the battle in disguise, but in 

8. Ahab's vain. An arrow, shot at random, inflicts 
Death a mortal wound. With the fortitude of 

a hero, in order to avoid a panic, Ahab 
remains in his chariot all day and dies at sunset. 
His body is taken to Samaria for burial. A great 
king had died, and the kingdom decUned rapidly 
after his death. He had failed to comprehend the 
greatness of Jehovah; he failed to stand for the 
highest justice, and his sins are visited upon his 
posterity (1 K 22 29f). 

(1) The Moabite Stone (see Moabite Stone) 
bears testimony (hues 7, 8) that Omri and his son 

(Ahab) ruled over the land of Meh- 

9. Ahab deba for forty years. When Ahab 
and was occupied with the Syr wars, 
Archaeology Moab rose in insurrection. Mesha 

informs us in an exaggerated manner 
that "Israel perished with an everlasting destruc- 
tion." Mesha recognizes Jeh as the God of Israel. 

(2) The Monolith of Shalmaneser II (Brit Mus; 
see Assyria) informs us that in 854 Shalmaneser ll 
came in conflict with the kingdom of Hamath, and 
that Benhadad II with Ahab of Israel and others 
formed a confederacy to resist the Assyrian advance. 
The forces of the coalition were defeated at Karkar. 

(3) Recent excavations. — Under the direction of 
Harvard University, excavations have been carried 
on in Samaria since 1908. In 1909 remains of a 
Heb palace were found. In this palace two grades 
of construction have been detected. The explorers 
suggest that they have found the palace of Omri, 
enlarged and improved by Ahab. This may be 
the "ivory house" built by Ahab. In August, 
1910, about 75 potsherds were found in a building 
adjacent to Ahab's palace containing writing. 
The script is the same as that of the Moabite Stone, 
the words being divided by ink spots. These 
ostraca seem to be labels attached to jars kept in a 
room adjoining Ahab's palace. One of them reads, 
"In the ninth year. From Shaphtan. For Ba'al- 
zamar. A jar of old wine." Another reads, 
"Wine of the vineyard of the Tell." These read- 
ings remind one of Naboth's vineyard. In another 
room not far from where the ostraca were found, 
"was found an alabaster vase inscribed with the 
name of Ahab's contemporary, Osorkon II of 
Egypt." Many proper names are found on the os- 
traca, which have their equivalent in the OT. 
It is claimed that the writing is far greater than all 
other ancient Hebrew writing yet known. Perhaps 
with the publication of all these writings we may 
expect much light upon Ahab's reign. (See 
Ostraca; Harvard Theological Review, January, 
1909, April, 1910, January, 1911; Sunday School 
Times, January 7, 1911; The Jewish Chronicle, 
January 27, 1911.) S. K. Mosiman 

AHAB, a'hab, and ZEDEKIAH, zed-e-ki'a (^XriX , 
'ah'abh, "uncle"; IH^p"?, gidhlflyahu, "Jeh is my 

righteousness"): Ahab, son of Kolaiah, and Zede- 
kiah, son of Maaseiah, were two prophets against 
whom Jeremiah uttered an oracle for prophesying 
falsely in the name of Jeh, and for immoral con- 
duct. They should be delivered over to Nebuchad- 
rezzar and be slain, and the captives of Judah 
that were in Babylon should take up the curse con- 
cerning them. "Jeh make thee like Zedekiah and 
like Ahab, whom the King of Babylon roasted in 
the fire" (Jer 29 21 ff). S. F. Hunter 

AHARAH, a'har-a, a-har'a (fTinX, 'ahrah; 
A, 'AapA, Aard; B, 'Ia^ai\K, laphafl, brother of 
Rah, or, a brother's follower, though some regard 
it as a textual corruption for Ahiram): A son of 
Benjamin (1 Ch 8 1). See Ahiram. 

AHARHEL, a-har'hel (^ninS , 'dharhel, "brother 
of Rachel"; LXX d8e\<|>oS Pt)xdp, adelphou 
Rechdb, "brother of Rechab"): A son of Harum of 
the tribe of Judah (1 Ch 4-8). 

AHASAI, a'ha-sl, a-ha'si. See Ahzai. 

AHASBAI, a-has'bi (i^OnX, 'dha^bay, "bloom- 
ing"): The father of Eliphele't, a Maacathite, a 
soldier in David's army (2 S 23 34). He was 
either a native of Abel-beth-maacah (20 14) or, 
more probably, of Maacah in Syria (10 6). The 
list in 1 Ch 11 35.36 gives different names en- 
tirely. Here we have Ur and Hepher, which simply 
show that the text is corrupt in one or both places. 

AHASUERUS, a-haz-u-e'rus, or ASSEURUS 
(LXX 'Ao-eroiliipos, Assoiieros, but in Tob 14 15 
Astieros; the Lat form of the Heb TCiT.lpnS!:, 
' dhashwerosh, a name better known in its ordinary 
Gr form of Xerxes): It was the name of two, or 
perhaps of three kings mentioned in the canonical, 
or apocryphal, books of the OT. 

There seems to be little reasonable doubt, that 

we should identify the Ahasuerus of Est with the 

well-known Xerxes, who reigned over 

1. In Persia from 485 to 465 BC, and who 
Esther made the great expedition against 

Greece that culminated in the defeat 
of the Pers forces at Salamis and Plataea. If 
Est be taken as equivalent to Ishtar, it may well 
be the same as the Amestris of Herodotus, which 
in Bab would be Ammi-Ishtar, or Ummi-Ishtar. 
Amestris is said to have been the daughter of Otanes, 
a distinguished general of Xerxes, and the grand- 
daughter of Sisamnes, a notorious judge, who was 
put to death with great cruelty by the king because 
of malfeasance in office. Sisamnes may be in 
Bab Shamash-ammanu-[shallim]. If he were the 
brother and Otanes the nephew of Mordecai, we 
can easily account for the ease with which the latter 
and his ward Est, were advanced and confirmed 
in their positions at the court of Xerxes. 

An Ahasuerus is mentioned in Ezr 4 6, as one 
to whom some persons unnamed wrote an accusa- 
tion against Judah and Jerusalem. 

2. In Ezra Ewald and others have suggested 

that this Ahasuerus was Cambyses, 
the son and successor of Cyrus. It seems to be 
more probable that Xerxes, the son and successor 
of Darius Hystaspis, is meant: first, because in 
the following ver Artaxerxes, the son and successor 
of Xerxes, is mentioned; and secondly, because 
we have no evidence whatever that Cambyses was 
ever called Ahasuerus, whereas there is absolute 
certainty that the Pers Khshayarsha, the Heb 
'dhashwerosh, the Gr Assoueros or Xerxes, and the 
Lat Ahasuerus, are the exact equivalents of one 




In the apocryphal book of Tob (14 15 AV) it is said 

that before Tobias died he heard of the destruction 

of Nineveh, which was taken by Na- 

3. In Tobit buchodonosor and Assuerus. This 

Assuerus can have been no other than 
Cyaxares, who according to Herod. (i.l96) took Nin- 
eveh and reduced the Assyrians into subjection, 
with the exception of the Bab district. As we shall 
see below, he was probably the same as the Ahas- 
uerus of Dnl (9 1). The phrase "which was taken 
by Nabuchodonosor and Assuerus" is not found in 
the Syr version of Tob. 

An Ahasuerus is said in Dnl 9 1 to have been the 

father of Darius the Mede, and to have been of the 

seed of the Medes. It is probable 

4. In Daniel that this Ahasuerus is the same as 

the Uvakhshatara of the Pers recen- 
sion of the Behistun inscription, which in the Bab 
is Umaku'ishtar, in the Susian Makishtarra, and 
in Herod Cyaxares. It will be noted that both the 
Gr Cyaxares and the Heb Akhashwerosh omit the 
preformative uva and the t of the Pers form Uvakh- 
shatara. That this Median king had sons Uving 
in the time of Cyrus is shown by the fact that two 
rebel aspirants to the throne in the time of Darius 
Hystaspis claimed to be his sons, to wit: Fra- 
vartish, a Median, who lied saying, "I am Khsha- 
thrita of the family of Uvaklishatara" (Behistun 
Inscr, col. II, v); and Citrantakhma, who said, 
"I am king in Sagartia of the family of Uvakh- 
shatara" (id, II, xiv). If we accept the identifi- 
cation of Gubaru with Darius the Mede, then the 
latter may well have been another of his sons, at 
first a sub-king to Astyages the Scythian, as he was 
later to Cyrus the Persian. R. Dick Wilson 

AHAVA, a-ha'va (S^HS , 'ahdwa') : The river in 
Babylonia on the banks of which Ezra gathered 
together the Jews who accompanied him to Jeru- 
salem. At this rendezvous the company encamped 
for three days to make preparation for the difficult 
and dangerous journey (Ezr 8 15 ff). On review- 
ing the people and the priests Ezra found no Levites 
among them; he therefore sent to Iddo, "the chief 
at the place Casiphia," a request for ministers for 
the temple. A number of Levites with 220 Nethi- 
nim returned to the rendezvous with the deputation. 
Ezra had expressed to the king his faith in the pro- 
tection of God; being, therefore, ashamed to ask 
for a military escort he proclaimed a fast to seek of 
God "a straight way." To 12 priests Ezra assigned 
the care of the offering for the temple in Jerusalem. 
When all was ready the company "departed from 
the river Ahava," and journeyed in safety to Jerus. 
This river, apparently called after a town or 
district toward which it flowed (8 15), reniams 
unidentified, .though many conjectures have been 
made. Rawlinson thinks it is the "Is of Herod. 
(i.79), now called "Hit," which flowed past a town 
of the same name in the Euphrates basin, 8 days 
journey from Babylon. Some identify the dis- 
trict with "Ivvah" (2 K 18 34, etc). Most prob- 
ably however, this was one of the numerous canals 
which intersected Babylonia, flowing from__ the 
Euphrates toward a town or district Ahava. It 
so, identification is impossible. S- F. Hunter 

AHAZ, a'haz (THX, 'ahaz, "he has grasped," 
2 K 16; 2 Ch 28; Isa 710 ff; 'AyAl, Achdz):ThQ 
name is the same as Jehoahaz; hence 
1. Name appears on Tiglath-pileser's Assyr in- 
scription of 732 BC as la-u-ha-zi. The 
sacred historians may have dropped the first part 
of the name in consequence of the character ot the 

Ahaz was the son of Jotham, king of Judah. He 
succeeded to the throne at the age of 20 years 

(according to another reading 25). The chronol- 
ogy of his reign is difficult, as his son Hezekiah 
is stated to have been 25 years of age 

2. The when he began to reign 16 years after 
Accession (2 K 18 2). If the accession of Ahaz 

be placed as early as 743 BC, his 
grandfather Uzziah, long unable to perform the 
functions of his office on account of his leprosy 
(2 Ch 26 21), must still have been ahve. (Others 
date Ahaz later, when Uzziah, for whom Jotham 
had acted as regent, was already dead.) 

Although so young, Ahaz seems at once to have 
struck out an independent course wholly opposed 

to the religious traditions of his nation. 

3. Early His first steps in this direction were the 
Idolatries causing to be made and circulated of 

molten images of the Baalim, and the 
revival in the valley of Hinnom, south of the city, 
of the abominations of the worship of Moloch 
(2 Ch 28 2.3). He is declared to have made his 
own son "pass through the fire" (2 K 16 3); the 
chronicler puts it even more strongly: he "burnt 
his children in the fire" (2 Ch 28 3). Other acts 
of idolatry were to follow. 

The kingdom of Judah was at this time in serious 
peril. Rezin, king of Damascus, and Pekab, king 

of Samaria, had already, in the days of 

4. Peril Jotham, begun to harass Judah (2 K 
from Syria 15 37) ; now a conspiracy was formed 
and Israel to dethrone the young Ahaz, and set 

upon the throne a certain "son of 
Tabeel" (Isa 7 6). An advance of the two kings 
was made against Jerus, although without success 
(2 K 16 5 ; Isa 7 1) ; the Jews were expelled from 
Elath (2 K 16 6), and the country was ravaged, 
and large numbers taken captive (2 Ch 28 5ff). 
Consternation was universal. The heart of Ahaz 
"trembled, and the heart of his people, as the trees 
of the forest tremble with the wind" (Isa 7 2). In 
his extremity Ahaz appealed to the king of Assyria 
for help (2 K 16 7; 2 Ch 28 16). 

Amid the general alarm and perturbation, the one 
man untouched by it in Jerus was the prophet 
Isaiah. Undismayed, Isaiah set him- 
5. Isaiah's self, apparently singlehanded, to turn 
Messages the tide of pubHc opinion from the 
to the King channel in which it was running, the 
seeking of aid from Assyria. His ap- 
peal was to both king and people. By Divine 
direction, meeting Ahaz "at the end of the conduit 
of the upper pool, in the highway of the fuller's 
field," he bade him have no fear of "these two tails 
of smoking firebrands," Rezin and Pekah, for, hke 
dying torches, they would speedily be extinguished 
(Isa 7 3 ff). If he would not believe this he would 
not be established (ver 9) . Failing to win the young 
king's confidence, Isaiah was sent a second time, 
with the offer from Jeh of any sign Ahaz chose to 
ask, "either in the depth, or in the height above," 
in attestation of the truth of the Divine word. 
The frivolous monarch refused the arbitrament on 
the hypocritical ground, "I will not ask, neither 
will I tempt Jeh" (vs 10-12). Possibly his am- 
bassadors were already despatched to the Assyr 
king. Whenever they went, they took with them a 
large subsidy with which to buy that ruler's favor 
(2 K 16 8). It was on this occasion that Isaiah, 
in reply to Ahaz, gave the reassuring prophecy of 
Immanuel (Isa 7 13 ff). 

As respects the people, Isaiah was directed to 
exhibit on "a great tablet" the words "For Maher- 
shalal-hash-baz" ("swift the spoil, 
6. Isaiah's speedy the prey"). This was attested 
Tablet by two witnesses, one of whom was 

Urijah, the high priest. It was a 
solemn testimony that, without any action on the 
part of Judah, "the riches of Damascus and the 

Ahaz, Dial of 



spoil of Samaria shall be carried away before the 
Mng of Assyria" (Isa 8 1-4). 

It was as the prophet had foretold. Damascus 

fell, Rezin was killed (2 K 16 9), and Israel was 

raided (15 29). The action brought 

7. Fall of temporary relief to Judah, but had 
Damascus the effect of placing her under the 
and Its heel of Assyria. Everyone then living 
Results knew that there could be no equal 

alliance between Judah and Assyria, 
and that the request for help, accompanied by the 
message, "I am thy servant" (2 K 16 7.8) and by 
"presents" of gold and silver, meant the submission 
of Judah and the annual payment of a heavy tribute. 
Had Isaiah's counsel been followed, Tiglath-pUeser 
would probably, in his own interests, have been com- 
pelled to crush the coalition, and Judah would have 
retained her freedom. 

The political storm having blown over for the 
present, with the final loss of the important port 

of Elath on the Red Sea (2 K 16 6), 

8. Sun-Dial Ahaz turned his attention to more 
of Ahaz congenial pursuits. The king was 

somewhat of a dilettante in matters 
of art, and he set up a sun-dial, which seems to 
have consisted of a series of steps arranged round 
a short pillar, the time being indicated by the posi- 
tion of the shadow on the steps (cf 2 K 20 9-11; 
Isa 38 8). As it is regarded as possible for the 
shadow to return 10 steps, it is clear that each step 
did not mark an hour of the day, but some smaller 

Another act of the king was to remove from the 

elaborate ornamental bases on which they had 

stood (cf 1 K 7 27-39), the ten lavers 

9. The of Solomon, and also to remove 
Lavers and Solomon's molten sea from the 12 
Brazen Sea brazen bulls which supported it (of 1 K 

7 23-26), the sea being placed upon 
a raised platform or pavement (2 K 16 17). From 
Jer 62 20, where the prophet sees "the 12 brazen 
bulls that were under the bases," it has been 
conjectured that the object of the change may have 
been to transfer the lavers to the backs of the 

To this was added a yet more daring act of im- 
piety. In 732 Ahaz was, with other vassal princes, 

summoned to Damascus to pay hom- 

10. The age to Tiglath-pileser (2 K 16 10; his 
Damascus name appears in the Assyr inscrip- 
Altar tion) . There he saw a heathen altar of 

fanciful pattern, which greatly pleased 
him. A model of this was sent to Urijah the high 
priest, with instructions to have an enlarged copy 
of it placed in the temple court. On the king's 
return to Jerus, he sacrificed at the new altar, but, 
not satisfied with its position, gave orders for a 
change. The altar had apparently been placed on 
the east side of the old altar; directions were now 
given for the brazen altar to be moved to the north, 
and the Damascus altar to be placed in line with it, 
in front of the temple, giving both equal honor. 
Orders were further given to Urijah that the cus- 
tomary sacrifices should be offered on the new altar, 
now called "the great altar," while the king re- 
served the brazen altar for himself "to inquire by" 
(2 K 16 15). 

Even this did not exhaust the royal innovations. 

We learn from a later notice that the doors of the 

temple porch were shut, that the golden 

11. Further candlestick was not lighted, that the 
Impieties offering of incense was not made, and 

other solemnities were suspended (2 
Ch 29 7). It is not improbable that it was Ahaz 
who set up 'the horses of the sun' mentioned in 
2 K 23 11, and gave them accommodation in the 
precincts of the temple. He certainly built the 

"altars .... on the roof of the upper chamber of 
Ahaz," perhaps above the porch of the temple, for 
the adoration of the heavenly bodies (ver 12) . Many 
other idolatries and acts of national apostasy are 
related regarding him (2 Ch 28 22 ff). 

In the later years of his unhappy reign there was 

a recurrence of hostihties with the inhabitants of 

Philistia and Edom, this time with 

12. Recur- disaster to Judah (see the list of places 
rence of lost in 2 Ch 28 18.19). New appeal 
Hostilities was made to Tiglath-pileser, whose 

subject Ahaz now was, and costly 
presents were sent from the temple, the royal 
palace, and even the houses of the princes of Judah, 
but without avail (vs 19-21). The Assyr 'dis- 
tressed' Ahaz, but rendered no assistance. In his 
trouble the wicked king only "trespassed yet more" 
(ver 22). 

Ahaz died in 728, after 16 years of misused power. 

The exultation with which the event was regarded 

is reflected in Isaiah's little prophecy 

13. Death written " in the year that King Ahaz 
of Ahaz died" (Isa 14 28-32). The statement 

in 2 K 16 20 that Ahaz "was buried 
with his fathers in the city of David" is to be under- 
stood in the light of 2 Ch 28 27, that he was buried 
in Jerusalem, but that his body was not laid in the 
sepulchers of the kings of Israel. His name appears 
in the royal genealogies in 1 Ch 3 13 and Mt 1 9. 
W. Shaw Caldbcott 
AHAZ, DIAL OF. See Dial op Ahaz. 

AHAZIAH, a-ha-zl'a (Hi'THS and in^JHSI, 
'Shazydh and 'Shazyahu, "Jeh holds, or sustains") : 

/. Ahaziah. — ^Son of Ahab and Jezebel, eighth 
king of Israel (1 K 22 51—2 K 1 18). 

Ahaziah became king over Israel in the seven- 
teenth year of Jehoshaphat, king of Judah, and 
he reigned two years, 854-853 BC. 

1. His There is here an incongruity between 
Reign the synchronism and the length of the 

reigns of the kings. Jehoshaphat be- 
gan to reign in the fourth year of Ahab (1 K 22 
41), and he reigned 22 years (IK 16 29). Accord- 
ingly Ahaziah's first year, in the twenty-second 
year of Ahab, would fall in the nineteenth year of 
Jehoshaphat. The chronological statement in 2 K 
1 17 is probably taken from the Syr, and both are 
in harmony with a method of computation followed 
by certain Gr MSS. 

A good name does not insure a good character. 
Ahaziah, the "God-sustained," served Baal and 

worshipped him, and provoked to anger 

2. His Jehovah, the God of Israel, just as 
Character his father before him had done. He 

appears to have been weak and un- 
fortunate, and calamities in quick succession pur- 
sued him. 

Ahab had sought the good and became an enemy 
to the best. His house and the nation suffered the 

consequences. "Moab rebelled against 

3. The Israel after the death of Ahab." 
Revolt of Ahaziah appears to have been too 
Moab weak to offer resistance. The Moabite 

Stone dates the revolt in the days of 
Ahab. No doubt it began at the time of Ahab's 
last campaign against Syria. 

According to 1 K 22 48f Ahaziah attempted 
to form an alliance with Jehoshaphat of Judah to 

revive the ancient maritime traffic, but 

4. His failed. According to 2 Ch 20 35-37 
Maritime the alliance was consummated, in con- 
Alliance sequence of which the enterprise came 

to nothing. See Jehoshaphat. 
Ahaziah suffered a severe accident by falling 
through the lattice in his upper apartment in 



Ahaz, Dial of 

Samaria, and lay sick. As a worthy son of Jezebel 
and Ahab, he sent messengers to consult Baal- 
zebub, the god of Ekron, regarding 
5. His his recovery. But Israel belonged 

Sickness to Jehovah. Accordingly the mes- 
and Death sengers were met by the prophet 
Elijah who for the last time warns 
against the corrupting moral influences of the Baal 
religion. "Thus saith Jehovah, Is it because there 
ia no God in Israel, that thou sendest to inquire 
of Baal-zebub, the god of Ekron? therefore thou 
shalt not come down from the bed whither thou 
art gone up, but shalt surely die" was the message 
which he sent back to the embassy, and the death 
of the king speedily followed. 

//. Ahaziah.Sixth king of Judah (2 K 8 25- 
29; 9 16f=2 Ch 22 1-9); also written Jehoahaz 
(2 Ch 21 17; 25 23), which is merely a trans- 
position of the component parts of the compound. 
The form "Azariah" (2 Ch 22 6) is an error, 
fifteen Heb MSS and all the VSS reading Ahaziah. 

Ahaziah, youngest son of Jehoram, began to 

reign in the twelfth year (2 K 8 25) of Jehoram of 

Israel. In 2 K 9 29 it is stated as the 

1. His eleventh. The former is probably the 
Brief Heb, the latter the Gr method of com- 
Reign putation, the LXX Luc also reading 

eleventh in 8 25. He was 22 years old 
when he began to reign and he reigned one year 
(2 K 8 26). The reading "forty two" (2 Ch 22 2) 
is a scribal error, since according to 2 Ch 21 5.20 
Jehoram the father was only 40 years old at the 
time of his death. Syr, Arab, and Luc read 22, 
LXX B 20. See Chkonology of OT. 

(Cf 2 K 8 27; 2 Ch 22 3.4.) In view of the 

disaster which befell the royal house (2 Ch 21 16. 

17), the inhabitants of Jerusalem 

2. His placed AJiaziah the youngest son upon 
Character the throne. That "he walked in the 

way of the house of Ahab" is exempli- 
fied by Ch to the effect that his mother, the daugh- 
ter of Jezebel, coxmseled him in the ways of wicked- 
ness and that the house of Ahab led him to his 
destruction. The influence of Jezebel was at work 
in Judah. Ahaziah dedicated "hallowed things" 
to Jeh (2 K 12 18), but he did evil in Jeh's eyes. 

(Cf 2 K 8 28.29; 2 Ch 22 5.6.) Ahaziah cul- 
tivated the relations which had been established 

between the two kingdoms by Ahab. 

3. His Alii- Accordingly he joined his uncle Jeho- 
ance with ram of Israel in an expedition against 
Jehoram of Hazael, king of Syria. Ramoth-gilead 
Israel was captured and held for Israel against 

the king of Syria (2 K 9 14). How- 
ever, Jehoram of Israel was wounded and returned 
to Jezreel to be healed of his wounds. It appears 
that the army was left in charge of Jehu at Ramoth- 
gUead. AJiaziah apparently went to Jems and later 
went down to Jezreel to visit Jehoram. In the mean- 
time Jehu formed a conspiracy against Jehoram. 

The death of Ahaziah, as told in 2 K 9 16 f, 
differs from the account in 2 Ch 22 7-9. Accord- 
ing to the account in K, Ahaziah who 

4. His is visiting Jehoram, joins him in a 
Death separate chariot to meet Jehu. Je- 
horam suspecting treachery turns to 

flee, but an arrow from the bow of Jehu pierces 
his heart and he dies in his chariot. Ahaziah tries 
to escape, but is overtaken near Ibleam and mor- 
tally wounded by one of Jehu's men. He fled to the 
fortress of Megiddo, where he died. His servants 
conveyed his body in a chariot to Jerus, where 
he was buried. According to the Chronicler, 
this account is very much abbreviated (2 Ch 22 
7f) His destruction is of God because of his 
alliance with Jehor9,m. Jehu, who was executing 
judgment on the house of Ahab, first slew the kins- 

men of Ahaziah. He then sought Ahaziah who was 
hiding in Samaria. When he was found, he was 
brought to Jehu and put to death. He was buried, 
but where and by whom we are not told. 

That there were other traditions respecting the 
death of Ahaziah, is proved by Jos, who says that 
when Ahaziah was wounded he left his chariot and 
fled on horseback to Megiddo, where he was well 
cared for by his servants until he died (Ant, IX, vi, 

3). S. K. MOBIMAN 

AHBAN, a'ban ("3nS, 'ahbdn, "brother of an 
inteUigent one"[?] 'Axapip, Achabdr): The son of 
Abishur of the tribe of Judah (1 Ch 2 29). 

AHER, a'her {^m,'aher, "another"; 'Aip, Air): 
A man of Benjamin (1 Ch 7 12), apparently a 
contracted form, perhaps the same as Ahiram (AV) 
(Nu 26 38) or Aharah (1 Ch 8 1). 

AHI or AH in proper names Cnijl or ns? , 'dhi or 
'ah "brother"): The usage is practically the same 
with that of 'abh, 'dhhi. See Abi; Names, Pbopeh. 

AHI, a'hi CnX , 'dhi, "my brother," or perhaps a 
contraction from Ahijah, which see): (1) A mem- 
ber of the tribe of Gad (1 Ch 5 15). (2) A 
member of the tribe of Asher (1 Ch 7 34). 

AHIAH, a-hi'a: A variant in AV (1 S 14 3.18; 

I K 4 3; 1 Ch 8 7) for Ahijah, which see. Also 
intheRV(Neh 10 26). 

AHIAM, a-hi'am (DSTlS, 'dhl'am, "mother's 
brother") : One of David's thirty heroes. He was 
the son of Sharar (2 S 23 33) or according to 1 Ch 

II 35 of Sacar, the Hararite. 

AHIAN, a-hl'an O'^riVi, 'ahyan, "brotherly"): A 
son of Shemida of the tribe of Manasseh (1 Ch 
7 19). 

AHIEZER, a-hl-e'zer (HTyTlS: , 'dhl'ezer, "brother 
is help"): (1) A son of Ammishaddai, a Danite 
prince, who acted as representative of his tribe on 
several occasions. (See Nu 1 12; 2 25; 7 66.71; 
10 25.) (2) One of the mighty men or warriors, 
who joined David at Ziklag when a fugitive before 
Saul (1 Ch 12 3). 

AHIHUD, a-hi'hud (TininSI , 'dhlhudh, "brother 
is majesty") : (1) One of the chief men of the tribe 
of Asher. He was selected by Moses to help divide 
the land west of the Jordan (Nu 34 27). (2) A 
son of Ehud of the tribe of Benjamin (1 Ch 8 6.7). 
The text here is obscure and probably corrupt. 

AHIJAH, a-hl'ja (n«nS or ^n^nS, 'dhlyah or 
'dhiydhu, "brother of Jeh,'" "my brother is Jeh," 
"Jeh is brother." In AV the name sometimes 
appears as Ahiah) : 

(1) One of the sons of Jerahmeel the great-grand- 
son of Judah (1 Ch 2 25). . 

(2) A descendant of Benjamin (1 Ch 8 7). 

(3) The son of Ahitub, priest in the time of King 
Saul (1 S 14 3.18). Either he is the same with 
Ahimelech, who is mentioned later, or he is the 
father or brother of Ahimelech. He is introduced 
to us when Saul has been so long on the throne that 
his son Jonathan is a man grown and a warrior. 
He is in attendance upon Saul, evidently as an 
official priest, "wearing an ephod." When Saul 
wishes direction from God he asks the priest to 
bring hither the ark; but then, without waiting for 
the message, Saul counts the confusion in the Phih 
camp a sufficient indication of the will of Providence, 
and hurries off to the attack. Some copies of the Gr 




here read "ephod" instead of "ark," but the docu- 
mentary evidence in favor of that reading is far from 
decisive. If the Heb reading is correct, then the 
seclusion of the ark, from the time of its return from 
Phihstia to the time of David, was not so absolute 
as many have supposed. See Ahimelbch I. 

(4) One of David's mighty men, according to the 
list in 1 Ch 11 36. The corresponding name in the 
list in 2 S 23 34 is Eliam the son of Ahithophel the 

(5) A Levite of David's time who had charge of 
certain treasures connected with the house of God 
(1 Ch 26 20). The Or copies presuppose the 
slightly different text which would give in Eng. 
"and their brethren," instead of Ahijah. This is 
accepted by many scholars, and it is at least more 
plausible than most of the proposed corrections of 
the Heb text by the Gr. 

(6) Son of Shisha and brother of Elihoreph (1 K 
4 3). The two brothers were scribes of Solomon. 
Can the scribes Ahijah and Shemaiah (1 Ch 24 6) 
be identified with the men of the same names who, 
later, were known as distinguished prophets? 
Shisha is probably the same with Shavsha (1 Ch 
18 16; cf 2 S 8 17; 20 25), who was scribe under 
David, the office in this case descending from father 
to son. 

(7) The distinguished prophet of Shiloh, who was 
interested in Jeroboam I. In Solomon's lifetime 
Ahijah clothed himself with a new robe, met Jero- 
boam outside Jerusalem, tore the robe into twelve 
pieces, and gave him ten, in token that he should 
become king of the ten tribes (1 K 11 29-39). 
Later, when Jeroboam had proved unfaithful to 
Jeh, he sent his wife to Ahijah to ask in regard to 
their sick son. The prophet received her harshly, 
foretold the death of the son, and threatened the 
extermination of the house of Jeroboam (1 K 14). 
The narrative makes the impression that Ahijah 
was at this time a very old man (ver 4). These 
incidents are differently narrated in the long addi- 
tion at 1 K 12 24 found in some of the Gr copies. 
In that addition the account of the sick boy pre- 
cedes that of the rent garment, and both are placed 
between the account of Jeroboam's return from 
Egypt and that of the secession of the ten tribes, 
an order in which it is impossible to think that the 
events occurred. Further, this addition attributes 
the incident of the rent garment to Shemaiah and 
not to Ahijah, and says that Ahijah was 60 years old. 

Other notices speak of the fulfilment of the threat- 
ening prophecies spoken by Ahijah (2 Ch 10 15; 
1 K 12 15; 15 29). In 2 Ch "the prophecy of 
Ahijah the Shilonite" is referred to as a source for 
the history of Solomon (9 29). 

(8) The father of Baasha king of Israel (1 K 15 
27.33; 21 22; 2 K 9 9). 

(9) A Levite of Nehemiah's time, who sealed the 
covenant (Neh 10 26 AV). Willis J. Beechee 

AHIKAM, a-hl'kam (Qp/nS, 'dhlkSm, "my 
brother has risen up"): A prominent man of the 
time of King Josiah and the following decades (2 K 
22 12.14; 25 22; 2 Ch 34 20; Jer 26 24; 39 14; 
40 5ff; 41 Iff; 43 6). He was the son of Sha- 
phan, who very likely is to be identified with 
Shaphan the scribe, who was at that time so promi- 
nent. Ahikam was the father of Gedaliah, whom, 
on the capture of Jerusalem, Nebuchadnezzar made 
governor of the land. Ahikam was a member of 
the deputation sent by Josiah to the prophetess 
Huldah to consult her concerning the contents of 
the Book of the Law which had been found. Under 
Jehoiakim he had sufficient influence to protect 
Jeremiah from being put to death. On the capture 
of Jerusalem Nebuchadnezzar committed Jeremiah 
into the care of Gedaliah. It is clear that both 

Shaphan and his son, like Jeremiah, belonged to the 
party which held that the men of Judah were under 
obligation to keep the oath which they had sworn 
to the king of Babylon. Willis J. Beecheb 

AHniUD, a-hi'lud ("ibinS, 'miudh, "child's 
brother," perhaps): The father of Jehoshaphat, 
who is mentioned as "recorder" in both the earlier 
and the later lists under David, and in the hst under 
Solomon (2 S 8 16 and 1 Ch 18 15; 2 S 20 24; 
1 K 4 3). In the absence of proof we may assume 
that the father of Baana, one of Solomon's district 
superintendents, was the same Ahilud (1 K 4 12). 

AHIMAAZ, a-hi-ma'az, a-him'&-az (f^-SPn^, 
'dhima'ag, perhaps "my brother is rage," or "broth- 
er of rage") : 

(1) Father of Ahinoam the wife of King Saul (1 S 
14 SO). 

(2) The son of Zadok the high priest (1 Ch 6 
8.9.53). With his father he remained loyal to 
David in the rebellions both of Absalom and of 
Adonijah. With Jonathan the son of Abiathar he 
carried information to David when he fled from 
Absalom (2 S 15 27.36; 17 17.20). At his own 
urgent request he carried tidings to David after 
the death of Absalom (2 8 18 19 ff). He told 
the king of the victory, and also, through his re- 
luctance to speak, informed him of Absalom's 
death. By his reluctance and his sympathy he 
softened a little the message, which the Cushite 
presently repeated more harshly. 

That Ahimaaz did not succeed his father as high 
priest has been inferred from the fact that in the 
Solomon list of heads of departments (1 K 4 2) 
Azariah the son of Zadok is mentioned as priest. 
It is assumed that this Azariah is the one who ap- 
pears in the genealogy as the son of Ahimaaz, and 
that for some reason Ahimaaz was left out of the 
succession. These inferences are not justified 
by the record, though possibly the record does not 
absolutely disprove them. As the list stands it 
makes Zadok and Abiathar the high priests. Azari- 
ah and Zabud, the son of Nathan (vs 2.5), are 
spoken of as holding priestly offices of a different 
kind. Ahimaaz may have died early, or may have 
followed some other career, but the simple fact is 
that we do not know. 

(3) Ahimaaz, in Naphtali, was one of Solo- 
mon's twelve commissary officers (1 K 4 15), who 
married Basemath the daughter of Solomon. It is 
not impossible that he was Ahimaaz the son of Zadok, 
though there is no proof to that effect. 

Willis J. Bebcher 
AHIMAN, a-hi'man Cj^^nS, 'dhlman, per- 
haps, "brother of fortune," or, "my brother is 

(1) One of the names given as those of the three 
"children of the Anak" (Nu 13 22; Josh 15 14; 
cf Nu 13 28; 2 S 21 16.18), or the three "sons 
of the Anak" (Josh 15 14; Jgs 1 20). The three 
names (Ahiman, Sheshai, Talmai) also occur to- 
gether in Jgs 1 10. The word Anak in the Heb 
Bible has the definite article except in Nu 13 33 
and Dt 9 2. Its use is that of a common noun 
denoting a certain type of man, rather than as the 
proper name of a person or a clan, though this need 
not prevent our thinking of the Anakim as a clan 
or group of clans, who regarded Arba as their 
founder. The question is raised whether Ahiman 
and Sheshai and Talmai are to be thought of as 
persons or as clans. The most natural understand- 
ing of the Bible statements is certainly to the effect 
that they were personal leaders among the Anakim 
of Kiriath-arba (Hebron). They were smitten and 
dispossessed by the tribe of Judah, with Caleb 
for leader. 




(2) A Levite, one of the gatekeepers of the latest 
Bible times (1 Ch 9 17). He is associated with 
Akkub and Talmon and their brethren: cf Neh 
11 19. Willis J. Beecher 

AHIMELECH, a-him'e-lek (TlbpTlS! , 'mmehkh, 
"brother of a king," or, "my brother is king," or, 
"king is brother") : 

(1) The father of David's high priest Abiathar: 
son of Ahitub, the son of Phinehas, the son of Eli 
(1 S 21 1.2.8; 22 9-20; 23 6; 30 7). Ahijah 
the son of Ahitub (1 S 14 3.18) was either the 
same person under another name, or was Ahim- 
eleoh's father or brother. See Ahijah, 3. Ahim- 
elech is an interesting person, especially because 
he stands for whatever information we have con- 
cerning the priestly office in Israel during the period 
between Eli and David. Whether the Deutero- 
nomic law for a central sanctuary originated with 
Moses or not, its provisions were very imperfectly 
eaiTied out during the times of the Judges. This 
was particularly the case after the capture of the 
ark by the Philistines, and the deaths of Eli and 
his sons. From that time to the middle of the reign 
of David the ark was in the custody of the men of 
Kiriath-jearim "in the hill," or "in Gibeah" (1 S 
7 1; 2 S 6 2.3). As a general proposition Israel 
"sought not unto it" (1 Ch 13 3), though there 
is nothing to forbid the idea that it may, on occasion, 
have been brought out from its seclusion (1 S 14 
18). Before and after the accession of Saul some 
of the functions of the national sanctuary were trans- 
acted, of course very incompletely, at Gilgal (1 S 
10 8; 11 14.15; 13 7ff; 15 12.21.33). Whether 
there was a priesthood, with Ahitub the grandson of 
Eli as high priest, is a matter on which we have no 
information; but we may remind ourselves that the 
common assumption that such men as Samuel and 
Saul performed priestly offices is nothing but an 

After Saul has been king for a good many years 
we find Ahijah in his retinue, acting as priest and 
wearing priestly vestments. A few years later 
Ahimelech is at the head of the very considerable 
priestly establishment at Nob. The scale on which 
it existed is indicated by the fact that 85 robed 
priests perished in the massacre (1 S 22 18). 
They had famiUes residing at Nob (ver 19). They 
were thought of as priests of Jehovah, and were 
held in reverence (ver 17). It was a hereditary 
priesthood (vs 11.15). Men deposited votive 
offerings there, the sword of Goliath, for example 
(21 9). There seems to have been some kind of 
police authority, whereby a person might be "de- 
tained" (21 7). It was customary to inquire of 
Jeh there (22 10.15). A distinction was made be- 
tween the common and the holy (21 4-6). The 
custom of the shewbread was maintained (21 6). 
In fine, Jesus is critically correct in calling the place 
"the house of God" (Mk 2 26). The account 
does not say that the ark was there, or that the 
burnt-offering of the morning and evening was 
offered, or that the great festivals were held. The 
priestly head of the establishment at Nob is repre- 
sented to have been the man who had the right to 
the office through his descent from Aaron. It is 
gratuitous to assume that there were other similar 
sanctuaries in Israel, though the proposition that 
there were none might be, like other negative propo- 
sitions, hard to establish by positive proof. 

(2) A son of Abiathar (2 S 8 17; 1 Ch 18 16; 
24 6); and grandson of the above. In a list of 
the heads of departments under David, a hst 
belonging later than the middle of David's 40 years, 
and in which David's sons appear, this Ahimelech, 
the son of David's friend, is mentioned as sharing 
with Zadok a high position in the priesthood. In 

this capacity, later, he shared with David and Zadok 
in the apportionment of the priests into 24 ancestral 
classes, 16 of the house of Eleazar, and 8 of the house 
of Ithamar (1 Ch 24). In this account Ahimelech 
is mentioned three times, and with some detail. It 
is alleged as a difficulty that Abiathar was then 
living, and was high priest along with Zadok (1 Ch 
15 11; 2 S 15 29; 19 11; 20 25; 1 K 2 27.35; 
4 4, etc). But surely there is no improbability in 
the, affirmation that Abiathar had a son named 
Ahimelech, or that this son performed prominent 
priestly functions in his father s lifetime. 

Many regard "Ahimelech the son of Abiathar" 
(Mt gives AMmelech) as an inadvertent transposi- 
tion for "Abiathar the son of Ahimelech." This is 
rather plausible in the passage in 2 S 8 and the 
duplicate of it in 1 Ch 18 16, but it has no apphca- 
tion in the detailed account in 1 Ch 24. One 
must accept Ahimelech the son of Abiathar as 
historical unless, indeed, one regards the testimony 
of Ch to a fact as evidence in disproof of that fact. 
See Abiathar. 

(3) A Hittite, a companion and friend of David, 
when he was hiding from Saul in the wilderness 
(1 S 26 6). Willis J. Beecher 

AHIMOTH, a-hi'moth (nTa^nii: , 'Hhimdlh, 
"brother of death," or, "my brother is death"): A 
descendant of Kohath the son of Levi (1 Ch 6 
25); ancestor of Elkanah the father of Samuel. 
The name Mahath holds a similar place in the Ust 
that follows (6 35). 

AHINADAB, a-hiriVdab (l"rnS , 'dhinSdhabh, 
"brother of willingness," or, "my brother is will- 
ing"): Decidedly the ordinary use of the stem 
nadhahh is to denote wUhngness rather than liber- 
ality or ilobleness. One of Solomon's twelve com- 
missary officers (1 K 4 14). He was the son of 
Iddo, and his district was Mahanaim. 

AHINOAM, a-hi-no'am, a-hin'o-am (Dybin^ 
'dhlno'am, "my brother is pleasantness"): 

(1) Daughter of Ahimaaz, and wife of King Saul 
(1 S 14 50). 

(2) The woman from Jezreel whom David mar- 
ried after Saul gave Michal to another husband. 
She and Abigail, the widow of Nabal, seem to have 
been David's only wives prior to the beginning of 
his reign in Hebron. His marriage to Abigail is 
mentioned first, with some details, followed by the 
statement, easily to be understood in the pluper- 
fect, that he had previously married Ahinoam (1 S 
26 39-44). Three times they are mentioned to- 
gether, Ahinoam always first (1 S 27 3; 30 5; 2 S 
2 2), and Ahinoam is the mother of David's first 
son, and Abigail of his second (2 S 3 2; 1 Ch 3 1). 
Ahinoam's son was Amnon. The record really rep- 
resents David's polygamy as a series of bids for 
political influence; the names of Amnon, Absalom, 
Adonijah suggest that the method was not finally a 
success. Willis J. Beecher 

AHIO, a-hl'6 (i'^nS, 'ahyo, variously explained 
as "his brother," "brotherly," "brother of Jeh," 
"my brother is Jeh"): Proper names containing 
a similar form of the name of Jeh are found on 
the ostraca recently exhumed at Samaria._ The 
word is always treated as a common noun in the 
ordinary Gr copies, being rendered either "brother" 
or "brothers," or "his brother" or "hisbrothers"; 
but this is probably to be taken as an instance of 
the relative inferiority of the Gr'text as compared 
with the MT. See Ostraca. 

(1) One of the sons of Beriah, the son of Mpaal, the 
son of Shaharaim and Hushim, reckoned among 
the families of Benjamin (1 Ch 8 14). Beriah 




and Shema are described as 'ancestral heads' "of the 
inhabitants of Aijalon, who put to flight the in- 
habitants of Gath." 

(2) A descendant of Jeiel ("the father of Gibeon") 
and his wife Maacah (1 Ch 8 31; 9 37). King 
Saul apparently came from the same family (8 30. 
33; 9 39). 

(3) One of the men who drove the new cart 
when David first attempted to bring the ark from 
the house of Abinadab to Jerus (2 S 6 3.4; 1 Ch 
13 7). In Samuel Uzza and Ahio are called sons 
of Abinadab. By the most natural understanding 
of the Biblical data about 100 years had elapsed 
since the ark was brought to the house; they were 
sons of that Abinadab in the sense of being his 
descendants. Whether he had a successor of the 
same name living in David's time is a matter of 
conjecture. Willis J. Beecher 

AHIRA, a-hi'ra {VTm, '&hira\ "brother of 
evil," or, "my brother is evil"): A man of Naph- 
tali, contemporary with Moses. He is five times 
mentioned as the son of Enan. He was the repre- 
sentative of his tribe who assisted Moses in the 
census (Nu 1 15). He was the hereditary "prince" 
of the tribe; he made the tribal offering (Nu 2 29; 
7 78; cf ver 83), and was commander of the 
tribal host when on the march (Nu 10 27). 

AHIRAM, a-hi'ram (D^TISC, 'dhiram, "exalted 
brother," or "my brother is exalted"): A son of 
Benjamin. Mentioned third of the five in Nu 26 
38.39. In 1 Ch 8 1 five sons are likewise men- 
tioned, being explicitly numbered; the third name, 
Aharah {'ahrah), is conjectured to be either a 
corruption of Ahiram or a different name for the 
same person. In 1 Ch 7 6 ff is a fuller list of 
Benjamite names, but it is fragmentary and not 
clear. In it occurs Aher {'aher), which may be 
either Ahiram or Aharah with the end of the word 
lost. In Gen 46 21 ten sons of Benjamin are men- 
tioned, some being there counted as sons who, in the 
other lists, are spoken of as more remote descend- 
ants. In this list Ehi (^ehl) is perhaps Ahiram 
apocopated. See Aharah; Aher; Ehi. 

Willis J. Beecher 

AHIRAMITE, a-hi'ratn-it CT3";,inS , 'dMraml, "of 
the family of Ahiram"; Nu 26 38). See Ahiram. 

AHISAMACH, a-his'a-mak (^'aD1^^l;, 'm^a- 
makh, "my brother supports") : A man of the tribe 
of Dan, father of Oholiab, who was the assistant 
of Bezalel in the building of the tent of meeting and 
preparing its furniture (Ex 31 6; 35 34; 38 23). 

AHISHAHAR, a-hish'a-har ("iniSinN, 'dhlshahar, 
"brother of dawn"): One of the sons of Bilhan, 
the son of Jediael, the son of Benjamin (1 Ch 7 10). 

AHISHAR, a-hish'ar ("llBTIii:, 'cthlshar, "my 
brother has sung"): Mentioned in Solomon's list 
of heads of departments as "over the household" 
■ (1 K 4 6). 

AHITHOPHEL, a-hith'o-fel (bsJT'nX, 'mtho- 
pkel, "brother of foolishness," perhaps): The real 
leader of the Absalom rebellion against David. 
He is described as "the king's counsellor," in a 
context connected with events some of which are 
dated in the fortieth year of David (1 Ch 27 33. 
34; cf26 31). Concerning him and his part in the 
rebellion we have rather full information (2 S 
15 12 ff). 

Some hold that he was the grandfather of Bath- 
sheba, and make much of this in forming their 
estimates of him. Does the evidence sustain this 
view? In the latter half of the list of David's mighty 

men, not among the older veterans with whom the 
list begins, appears "EUam the son of Ahithophel 
the Gilonite" (2 S 23 34), the corresponding name 
in the other copy of the list being "Ahijah the Pelo- 
nite" (1 Ch 11 36). It is assumed that this is the 
same Eliam who was father to Bath-sheba (2 S 11 3). 
Apparently the Chronicler testifies (1 Ch 3 6) that 
the mother of Solomon was "Bath-shua the daughter 
of Ammiel." Bathshua may easily be a variant 
of Bathsheba, and the names Eham and Ammiel 
are made up of the same parts, only in reversed 
order. It is not strange that men have inferred 
that the son of Ahithophel was the father of Bath- 
sheba. But the inference is really not a probable 
one. The record does not make the impression 
that Ahithophel was an older man than David. 
The recorded events of David's life after his mis- 
conduct with Bathsheba cannot have occupied 
less than about twenty years; that is, he cannot have 
been at the time older than about fifty years. That 
Ahithophel had then a married granddaughter is 
less probable than that there were in Israel two 
Eliams. Further, Ahithophel was not the sort of 
man to conspire against the interests of his grand- 
daughter and her son, however he may, earlier, 
have resented the conduct of David toward her. 
Ahithophel's motive in the rebellion was doubtless 
ambition for personal power, though he very likely 
shared with many of his countrymen in the convic- 
tion that it was unjust to push aside an older son 
by elevating a younger son to the throne. 

Ahithophel has a reputation for marvelous 
practical sagacity (2 S 16 23). He did not show 
this in joining the conspiracy but it is in evidence 
in his management of the affair. According to the 
record the hearts of the people, in spite of the much 
fault they had to find, were all the time with David. 
Absalom's only chance of success was by the method 
of surprise and stampede. There must be a crisis 
in which everybody would join Absalom because 
everybody thought that everybody else had done 
so. Such a state of public sentiment could last only 
a very few days; but if, in those few days, David 
could be put out of the way, Absalom might hold 
the throne in virtue of his personal popularity and 
in default of a rival. The first part of the program 
was carried out with wonderful success; when it 
came to the second part, Ahithophel's practical 
wisdom was blocked by Hushai's adroit appeal 
to Absalom's personal vanity. Ahithophel saw with 
absolute clearness that Absalom had sacrificed his 
one opportunity, and he committed suicide to avoid 
participation in the shameful defeat which he saw 
could not be averted. Willis J. Beecher 

AHITOB, a-hi'tob ('Axiriip, Achitoh; AV Achitob) : 
One of the ancestors of Ezra (1 Esd 8 2; 2 Esd 
1 1). Cf Ahitub, 3 (Ezr 7 2 et al.). 

AHITTJB, a-hi'tub (niOTlS?, 'dhituhh, "brother 
of goodness," i.e. "good brother," or, "my brother 
is goodness"): 

(1) The brother of Ichabod and son of Phinehas 
the son of EU (1 S 14 3; 22, Accord- 
ing to 1 Ch 24 he and his line were descended from 
Aaron through Ithamar. The record implies that 
he was born while his father and grandfather were 
priests at Shiloh, and it says that he was the father 
and grandfather of priests; but it is silent as to his 
own exercise of the priestly office. We have no 
information concerning the office from the time 
when the Philis captured the ark till Saul became 
king. See Ahijah; Ahimelech; Abiathar. 

(2) A descendant of Aaron through Eleazar: 
by this fact distinguished from Ahitub, the descend- 
ant of Ithamar, though nearly contemporaneous 
with him. Esp. known as the father of Zadok 




who, at Solomon's accession, became sole high 
priest (2 S 8 17; 1 Ch 6 8; 18 16). His genea- 
logical line, from Levi to the Exile, is given in 1 Ch 
6 1-15 (5 27-41). The three successive names, 
Ahitub and Zadok and Ahimaaz, appear in 2 S 
(8 17; 16 27, etc). The line is paralleled by select- 
ed names in Ezr 7 1-5, and relatively late parts of 
it are paralleled in 1 Ch 9 11 and Neh 11 11. 
The best explanation of certain phenomena in Ch 
is that the record was copied from originals that 
were more or less fragmentary. In some cases, 
also, a writer gives only such parts of a genealogy 
as are needed for his purpose. It is due to these 
caiises that there are many omissions in the genea- 
logical lists, and that they supplement one another. 
Allowing for these facts there is no reason why we 
should not regard the genealogies of Ahitub as having 
distinct historical value. 

(3) In the genealogies, in the seventh generation 
from Ahitub, the descendant of Eleazar, appears 
another Ahitub, the son of another Amariah and the 
father (or grandfather) of another Zadok (1 Ch 6 
11 [5 37]; 9 11; Neh 11 11). The hst in Ezr 7 
omits a block of names, and the Ahitub there named 
may be either 2 or 3. He is mentioned in 1 Esd 
8 2 and 2 Esd 1 1, and the name occurs in Jth 
8 1. In these places it appears in the Eng. ver- 
sions in the various forms Ahitub, Ahitob, Achitob, 
Acitho. Willis J. Beecher 

AHLAB, a'lab (ibns, 'ahlabh, "fat or fruitful") : 
A town of Asher. It is clear, however, that the 
IsraeKtes failed to drive away the original inhabi- 
tants (Jgs 1 31). Some have identified Ahlab with 
Gush Halab or Geschila, N.W. of the Sea of Galilee. 

AHLAI, all C'bnS, 'ahlay "O would that!"): 
(1) A Son of Sheshan (1 Ch 2 31) or according to 
ver 34 a daughter of Sheshan, for here we read: 
"Now Sheshan had no sons, but daughters." (2) 
The father of Zabad, a soldier in David's army 
(1 Ch 11 41). 

AHOAH, a-ho'a (ninS , 'dho'^h, "brotherly" [?]): 
A son of Bela of the tribe of Benjamin (1 Ch 8 4). 

AHOHITE, a-hoTiIt (Tlin^, 'dhohi): A patro- 
nymic employed in connection with the descendants 
of Ahoah (q.v.) such as Dodai (2 S 23 9) or Dodo 
1 Ch 11 12), Ilai (29) or Zalmon (2 S 23 28), 
and also Eleazar, son of Dodo (1 Ch 11 12). The 
family must have been fond of military affairs, for 
all the above were officers in David and Solomon's 

AHOLAH, a-ho'la. See Oholah. 

AHOLIAB, a-ho-ll'ab. See Oholiab. 

AHOLIAH, a-ho-li'a. See Oholiah. 

AHOLIBAH, a-ho'li-ba. See Oholibah. 

AHOLEBAMAH, a-ho-li-ba'ma. See Oholibamah. 

AHTJMAI, a-hu'ma-i, a-hu'ml (^^inX , 'dhumay, 
"brother of water"[?]): A descendant of Shobal of 
the tribe of Judah (1 Ch 4 2). 

AHTJZZAM, a-huz'am, AHUZAM, a-hu'zam 
(D-'rnS?, 'dhuzzdm, "possessor"): A son of Ashahur 
of the tribe of Judah; his mother's name was Naarah 
(1 Ch 4 6); written Ahuzam in AV. 

AHTJZZATH, a-huz'ath (H-inSI, 'dhuzzath, "pos- 
session"): A "friend" perhaps a minister, of Abim- 
elech, king of Gerar. He together with Phicol, 

cornmander of the army, accompanied their sov- 
ereign to Beersheba to make a covenant with Isaac 
(Gen 26 26). The termination -ath reminds us of 
PhiU proper names, such as Gath, Goliath, etc. Cf 
Genubath (1 K 11 20). 

AHZAI, a'zi C^TtlX, 'ahzay, "my protector"): A 
priest who resided in Jerus (Neh 11 13). The AV 
has Ahasai which is probably the same as Jahzevah 
of 1 Ch 9 12. 

AI, a'i Cy, 'ay, written always with the def. 
art., "^yn, ha-'ay, probably meaning "the ruin," 
kindred root, Hiy , 'dwdh) : 

(1) A town of central Palestine, in the tribe of 
Benjamin, near and just east of Bethel (Gen 12 
8). It is identified with the modern HaiyAn, just 
south of the village Dir Diwdn (Conder in HDB; 
Dehtzsch in Comm. on Gen 12 8) or with a mound, 
El-Tell, to the north of the modern village (Davis, 
Diet. Bib.). The name first appears in the earliest 
journey of Abraham through Pal (Gen 12 8), 
where its location is given as east of Bethel, and 
near the altar which Abraham built between the 



^- f: —^- ^j,f, ,<;,;. 

Ascent to Ai: Path to Elijah's Translation. 

two places. It is given similar mention as he re- 
turns from his sojourn in Egypt (Gen 13 3). 
In both of these occurrences the AV has the form 
Hai, including the article in transliterating. The 
most conspicuous mention of Ai is in the narrative 
of the Conquest. As a consequence of the sin of 
Achan in appropriating articles from the devoted 
spoil of Jericho, the Israelites were routed in the 
attack upon the town; but after confession and 
expiation, a second assault was successful, the city 
was taken and burned, and left a heap of ruins, the 
inhabitants, in number twelve thousand, were put 
to death, the king captured, hanged and buried under 
a heap of stones at the gate of the ruined city, only 
the cattle being kept as spoil by the people (Josh 
7, 8). The town had not been rebuilt when Josh 
was written (Josh 8 28). The fall of Ai gave the 
Israelites entrance to the heart of Canaan, where 
at once they became established. Bethel and other 
towns in the vicinity seeming to have yielded with- 
out a struggle. Ai was rebuilt at some later period, 
and is mentioned by Isa (10 28) in his vivid descrip- 
tion of the approach of the Assyr army, the feminine 
form (rijy, 'ayyath) being used. Its place in the 
order of march, as just beyond Michmash from 
Jerusalem, corresponds with the identification given 
above. It is mentioned also in post-exilic times by 
Ezr (2 28) and Neh (7 32, and in 11 31 as S^? , 
'ayya'), identified in each case by the grouping with 

(2) The Ai of Jer 49 3 is an Ammonite town, the 
text probably being a corruption of 1^ , 'dr; or 
liyn , ha-'ir, "the city" (BDB). Edward Mack 




AIAH, a'ya(njS, 'ayyah, "falcon"; once in AV 
Ajah, Gen 36 24): (1) A Horite, son of Zibeon, 
and brother of Anah, who was father of one of 
Esau^s wives (Gen 36 24; 1 Ch 1 40). (2) Father 
of Rizpah, a concubine of Saul, about whom Ish- 
bosheth falsely accused Abner (2 S 3 7), and whose 
sons were hanged to appease the Gibeonites, whom 
Saul had wronged (2 S 21 8-11). 

AIATH, a'yath (HJ? , ^ayyath) : Found in Isa 10 
28; feminine form of the city Ai (q.v.). 

AID, ad (pTn, hazal!,, "to strengthen," "to aid"): 
A military term used only once in OT in AV (Jgs 

9 24) and displaced in RV by the lit. rendering, 
"who strengthened his hands." The men of She- 
chem supported Abimelech in his fratricidal crime, 
with money, enabhng him to hire men to murder 
his brethren. The fundamental idea in the word, 
as used in the OT, is abounding strength. 

AIJA, S-I'ja (S^? , 'ayya') : A form of name for 
city Ai, found in Neh 11 31. See Ai; Aiath. 

AIJALON, a'ja-lon i\\b'^^,'ayyaldn, "deerplace"; 
AV Ajalon [Josh 10 12]) : 

(1) The name of a town allotted to the tribe of Dan 
(Josh 19 42), which was also designated a Levitical 
city (Josh 21 24), which fell to the Sons of Kohath 
(1 Ch 6 69). The first mention of Aijalon is in 
the narrative of Joshua's defeat of the five Amorite 
kings: "thou, Moon, in the valley of Aijalon" (Josh 

10 12). The Danites failed to take it from the 

Valley of Aijalon. 

Amorites (Jgs 1 35), although the men of Ephra- 
im held it in vassalage. Here Saul and Jonathan 
won a great victory over the Philistines (1 S 14 31). 
At one time it was held by the tribe of Benjamin 
(1 Ch 8 13). Rehoboam fortified it against the 
kingdom of Israel (2 Ch 11 10). In the days of 
King Ahaz it was captured by the Philis (2 Ch 
28 18). It has been identified with the modern 
Yalo; its antiquity goes back to Am Tab, in which 
it has mention. It is situated N.W. of Jerus in a 
valley of the same name, which leads down from the 
mountains to the sea. 

(2) A town in the tribe of Zebulun, site unknown, 
where Elon the judge was buried (Jgs 12 12). 

Edward Mack 

AIJELETH HASH-SHAHAR, a'je-leth hash- 
sha'har. See Psalms; Song. 

AIL, al (AS eglan, "to pain"): As a verb trans, is 
"to trouble," "afflict" (obs); intrans, "to feel pain, 
trouble, uneasiness," etc; it represents Heb mah 
I'kha "what to thee" (Gen 21 17, "What aileth 
thee, Hagar?"; Jgs 18 23; 1 S 11 5; 2 S 14 5; 
2 K 6 28; Isa 22 1); in Ps 114 5, it is figura- 
tively or poetically applied to the sea, the river 
Jordan, etc: "What ailed thee, O thou sea, that 
thou fleddest?" etc; RV, "What aileth thee, O thou 
sea that thou fleest?" etc; in 2 Esd 9 42; 10 31, 
"What aileth thee?" 

AIM, am: In Wisd 13 9. Lit. tr by AV of 
Gr <rTox<io'ocr6ai, stochdsasthai, which commonly 
means "to shoot at." This is interpreted and 
explained by RV as "explore," with a hint as to 
the nature of the process, and may be paraphrased : 
"If they be able to conjecture the mysteries of the 

AIN. See Atin. 

AIN, a'in (']'?? , "-ayin, "eye or spring [of water]") : 

(1) A town in the extreme N.W. corner of Canaan, 
so named, most probably, from a noted spring 
in the vicinity (Nu 34 11). Thomson and after 
him Robinson make Ain the same as 'Ain el-'Asy, 
the chief source of the Orontes, some fifteen miles 
S.W. of Riblah, which, in turn, is about twenty 
miles S.W. of Emesa (Hums). As Ain is named in 
connection with Lake Gennesaret, some claim that 
Riblah of Nu 34 11 must be another place farther 
S. and closer to that lake. 

(2) A Levitical city (Josh 21 16) in the Negeb 
or southern part of Judah. It was first allotted to 
the tribe of Judah (15 32) but later to Simeon (19 
7). The fact that it is several times named in 
immediate connection with Rimmon has lent 
plausibility to the view that we have here a com- 
pound word, and that we should read En-Rimmon, 
i.e. Ain-Rimmon (see Josh 15 32; 19 7; 1 Ch 
4 32). See also Atin. W. W. Da vies 

AIR, Ar (a^p, air): In the OT "air" is used (with 
one exception) in the phrase "fowl" or "fowls 
(birds) of the air." The Heb word is usually rendered 
"heaven" or "heavens." According to ancient 
Heb cosmogony the sky was a solid dome (firmament) 
stretching over the earth as a covering. In the 
above phrase the air means the space between the 
earth and the firmament. In Job (41 16) "air" 
renders n^"l, ru"'h, "breath," "wind," "spirit." 
The scales of the leviathan are so closely joined 
together that no air can penetrate. In the NT the 
phrase "birds [or fowls] of the air," occurs ten times. 
This simply reproduces the Hebraism noticed above. 
Apart from this expression "air" in the AV repre- 
sents aer, which denotes the atmosphere which sur- 
rounds us. The expression "beating the air" (1 Cor 
9 26) means to "deal blows that do not get home" — 
that miss the mark. In his conflict with the lower 
life represented by the body, Paul compares him- 
self to a boxer who aims with unerring accuracy 
at his opponent. No stroke is lost. Paul also 
uses the phrase "speaking into the air" (1 Cor 14 9) 
in reference to the unintelligible utterances of those 
who "spake with tongues." In the expression, 
"prince of the powers of the air" (Eph 2 2 AV) we 
find an echo of the current belief that the air was the 
dwelling place of spirits, especially of evil spirits. 

Thomas Lewis 

AIRUS, a-i'rus, &r'us ('latpos, lairos) : AV, one of 
the heads of a family of temple servants (1 Esd 5 
31 RV JAIRUS), which returned from Babylon with 
Zerubbabel; in the OT called Reaiah (Ezr 2 47; 
Neh 7 60), and classed among the Nethinim. 

AJAH, a'ja. An Edomite tribe (Gen 36 24 AV). 
See Aiah. 

AJALON, aj'a-lon. See Aijalon. 

AKA.N, aTian ('p^? , 'dkan, "twisted"): A son 
of Ezer, a descendant of Esau of Seir (Gen 36 27). 
He is called Jaakan in 1 Ch 1 42. The AVm has 

AKATAN, ak'a-tan ('AKarAv, Akatdn; AV Aca- 
tan = Hakkatan; Ezr 8 12): The father of Joannes 
who returned with Ezra to Jerus (1 Esd 8 38). 




AKELDAMA, a-kel'da-ma ('AK€\8o|id, AkeldO' 
md, or, in many MSS, 'AK6\8o|j.dx, Akeldamdch; 
AV Aceldama) : A field said in Acts 1 19 to have 
been bought by Judas with the "thirty pieces of 
silver." In Mt 27 6.7 it is narrated that the 
priests took the silver pieces which Judas had 
"cast down .... into the sanctuary" and "bought 
with them the potter's field, to bury strangers in. 
Wherefore that field was called, The field of blood, 
unto this day." Doubtless it was a supposed con- 
nection between this potter's field and the potter's 
house (Jer 18 2) and the Valley of the Son of Hin- 
nom (Jer 19 2) which influenced the selection of the 
present site which, like the Aram. STSIspn (Dal- 
man), is today known as hakk-ed-dumm, "field of 

Tradition, which appears to go back to the 4th 
cent., points to a level platform on, and some dis- 
tance up, the southern slope of the Wady er Rababi 
(Valley of Hinnom) just before it joins the Kidron 
Valley. Upon this spot there is a very remarkable 
ruin (78 ft.X57 ft.) which for many centuries 
was used as a charnel house. The earth here was 
reputed to have the property of quickly consuming 
dead bodies. So great was its reputation that vast 
quantities of it are said to have been transported 
in 1215 AD to the Campo Santo at Pisa. When this 
building was standing entire, the bodies were low- 
ered into it through five openings in the roof and 
then left to disintegrate, so that a few years ago 
there were very many feet of bones all over the 
floor. These have now been removed. A little S.E. 
of this ruin is a new Greek monastery erected in 
recent years over the remains of a large number of 
cave tombs; many of the bones from "Akeldama" 
are now buried here. E. W. G. Mastebman 

AKKAD, ak'ad, AKKADIANS, a-ka'di-ans. See 
Accad; Accadians. 

AKKOS, ak'os ('AK^iis, Akbos in 1 Esd 5 38; 
AV Accos, which see): The OT equivalent (1 Ch 
24 10; Ezr 2 61; Neh 3 4.21) is Hakkoz (ppH, 
haklfos), which also see. 

AKKUB, ak'ub (Hip?, 'akkiibh, "pursuer"): 
(1) A son of EUoenai, a descendant of Zerubbabel 
(1 Ch 3 24). (2) A Levite porter on duty at the 
east gate of the second Temple (1 Ch 9 17). 

AKRABATTINE, ak-ra-ba-ti'nS ('AKpaPoTTCvt), 

Akrabattine; AV Aiabattine): A place in Idumaea 
where Judas Maccabee defeated the children of 
Esau (1 Mace 5 3). 

AKRABBIM, ak-rab'im (once in AV Acrabbim 
[Josh 15 3]; n"'3"3p?, 'akrabbim, "scorpions"): 
Three times found' (Nu 34 4; Josh 16 3; Jgs 
1 36), and always with nby^ , ma'dleh, "ascent" 
or "pass"; and so "Ascent of the Scorpions," an 
ascent at the 8.W. point of the Dead Sea and a part 
of the boundary line between Judah and Edom. 
At this pass Judas Maccabaeus won a victory 
over the Edomites (1 Mace 5 3), called in the AV 

ALABASTER, al'a-bas-ter (dXdPao-Tpov, aldbas- 
tron [Mt 26 7; Mk 14 3; Lk 7 37]): In modern 
mineralogy alabaster is crystalUne gypsum or sul- 
phate of lime. The Gr word alahastron or alahas- 
tos meant a stone casket or vase, and alabastites 
was used for the stone of which the casket was 
made. This stone was usually crystalline stalag- 
mitic rock or carbonate of lime, now often called 
oriental alabaster, to distinguish it from gypsum. 
The word occurs in the Bible only in the three 
passages of the Synoptic Gospels cited above. See 

ALAMETH, al'a-meth (fip^^, 'alameih, "con- 
cealment"; 1 Ch 7 8 AV): The name of a son of 
Becher and grandson of Benjamin. His name was 
preserved as the name of a town near Anathoth 
(ALLEMETH, 1 Ch 6 60 RV). Except for the 
strong pausal accent in the Heb the form of the word 
would be the same as Albmeth (q.v.). 

ALAMMELECH, a-lam'e-lek: AV (Josh 19 26) 
for Allammelbch (q.v.). 

ALAMOTH, al'a-moth. See Music. 

ALARM, a-larm' (fiyi'in , Pru^ah) : This expres- 
sion is found six times in the OT. The Heb 
word so rendered is derived from a verb meaning 
"to shout" or "blow a horn," as a signal for break- 
ing up camp, starting on a journey or into battle, or 
in triumphant shout over the defeat of enemies. 
In a few instances it is employed of a cry of despair 
or distress. The noun f^ru'dh translated "alarm" 
in Nu 10 6 f refers to the signal given the people 
of Israel to start on their journey in the Wilderness. 
The passages in Jer (4 19; 49 2) both refer to the 
summons for war. The same is true of Zeph 1 16. 

The law concerning the sounding of the alarm 
is fully stated in Nu 10 1-10. Here we read that 
two silver trumpets of beaten work were sounded 
by the sons of Aaron in case of war and also "in 
the day of ... . gladness" to gather the people 
together for the various feasts, new moons, sacri- 
fices and offerings. W. W. Davies 

ALBEIT, 61-be'it (Svo ni|, Una mi; Ut. "lest"): 
Occurs in a paraphrase rather than as a tr of a 
clause in Philem 19 AV. The thought is : "although" 
or "albeit" (synonym of "although") "I might say," 
etc. This RV translates with intense literalness: 
"that I say not." 

ALCIMUS, al'si-mus (Qp^'pS:, 'elydlplm, "God 
will rise"; "AXkijios, Alkimos, "valiant"): A high 
priest for three years, 163-161 BC, the record 
of whose career may be found in 1 Mace 7 4-50; 
9 1-57; 2 Mace 14; see also Ant, XII, 9-11; 
XX, 10. He was a descendant of Aaron, but not 
in the high-priestly line (1 Mace 7 14; also Ant, 
XX, 10); and being ambitious for the office of 
high priest, he hastened to Antioch to secure the 
favor and help of the new king, Demetrius, who had 
just overthrown Antiochus Eupator and made him- 
self king. Alcimus was of the Grecianizing party, 
and therefore bitterly opposed by the Maccabees. 
Demetrius sent a strong army under Bacchides to 
estabUsh him in the high-priesthood at Jems. 
The favor with which Alcimus was received by the 
Jews at Jerus on account of his Aaronic descent 
was soon turned to hate by his cruelties. When 
Bacchides and his army returned to Antioch, Simon 
Maccabaeus attacked and overcame Alcimus, and 
drove him also to Syria. There he secured from 
Demetrius another army, led by Nicanor, who, 
failing to secure Simon by treachery, joined battle 
with him, but was defeated and killed. A third 
and greater army, under Bacchides again, was dis- 
patched to save the falling fortunes of Alcimus. 
Now Simon was overwhelmed and slain, Alcimus 
established as high priest and a strong force left 
in Jerus to uphold him. But he did not long enjoy 
his triumph, as he died soon after from a paralytic 
stroke. Edward Mack 

ALCOVE, al'kov (nSp, kubbah; AV tent; ARV 
pavihon; ARVm alcove): Perhaps a large tent 
occupied by a prince (Nu 26 8) . 

ALEMA, al'g-ma ('A\^|j.ois, Alemois): A town 
in Gilead, mentioned once only (1 Mace 6 26), 




besieged by the nations under Timotheus, together 
with Bosor and other cities; and probably relieved 
along with these cities by Judas Maocabaeus, 
although no mention is made of Alema's relief. The 
name occurs the one time as dative pi. 

ALEMETH, al'g-meth (T^'obyi , 'alemeth, "con- 
cealment") : (1) RV for Alameth of the AV in 1 Ch 
7 8. (2) Descendant of Saul and Jonathan, and son 
of Jehoaddah, 1 Ch 8 36, or of Jarah, 1 Ch 9 42. 
The genealogies in the two chapters are identical, 
and he is the fifth generation after Jonathan. (3) 
In some Heb texts, Ginsburg and Baer, for Al- 
LEMETH (q.v.) ; so in AV. 

ALEPH, alef (^5, ') : The first letter of the Heb 
alphabet. It is nearly soundless itself and best 
represented, as in this Enc, by the smooth breath- 
ing ('), but it is the direct ancestor of the Gr, Lat 
and Eng. a as in "father." In either case this 
beginning of the alphabet happens to be near the 
very basis of all speech — in one case the simple 
expiration of breath, in the other the simplest 
possible vocal action — the actual basis from which 
all other vowels are evolved. It became also the 
symbol for the number one (1) and, with the diere- 
sis, 1,000. It is the symbol also for one of the most 
famous of Gr Biblical MSS, the Codex Sinaiticus. 
For name, written form, etc, see Alphabet. 

E. C. Richardson 

ALEPPO, a-lep'5. See Bbrea. 

ALEXANDER, al-eg-zan'der ('AX4|ov8pos, AUx- 
andros, lit. meaning "defender of men." This word 
occurs five times in the NT, Mk 15 21; Acts 4 6; 
19 33; 1 Tim 1 19.20; 2 Tim 4 14): It is not 
certain whether the third, fourth and fifth of these 
passages refer to the same man. 

(1) The first of these Alexanders is referred to in 
the passage in Mk, where he is said to have been 
one of the sons of Simon of Cyxene, 
1. A Son the man who carried the cross of 
of Simon Christ. Alexander therefore may have 
of Cyrene been a North African by birth. Mt, 
Mk and Lk all record the fact, with 
varying detail, that Simon happened to be passing 
at the time when Christ was being led out of the 
city, to be crucified on Calvary. Mk alone tells 
that Simon was the father of Alexander and Rufus. 
From this statement of the evangehst, it is appar- 
ent that at the time the Second Gospel was written, 
Alexander and Rufus were Christians, and that 
they were well known in the Christian community. 
Mk takes it for granted that the first readers of Ms 
Gospel will at once understand whom he means. 

There is no other mention of Alexander in the 
NT, but it is usually thought that his brother 
Rufus is the person mentioned by Paul in Rom 
16 13, "Salute Rufus the chosen in the Lord, and 
his mother and mine." If this identification is 
correct, then it follows, not only that the sons of 
Simon were Christians, but that his wife also was 
a Christian, and that they had all continued faith- 
ful to Christ for many years. It would also follow 
that the households were among the intimate friends 
of Paul, so much so that the mother of the family is 
affectionately addressed by him as "Rufus' mother 
and mine." The meaning of this is, that in time 
past this lady had treated Paul with the tender care 
which a mother feels and shows to her own son. 

This mention of Rufus and his mother is in the 
list of names of Christians resident in Rome. 
Lightfoot (Comm. on Phil, 176) writes: "There 
seems no reason to doubt the tradition that Mk 
wrote especially for the Romans; and if so, it is 
worth remarking that he alone of the evangelists 
describes Simon of Cyrene, as 'the father of Alex- 

ander and Rufus.' A person of this name there- 
fore (Rufus) seems to have held a prominent place 
among the Rom Christians; and thus there is at 
least fair ground for identifying the Rufus of St. 
Paul with the Rufus of St. Mark. The inscriptions 
exhibit several members of the household (of the 
emperor) bearing the names Rufus and Alexander, 
but this fact is of no value where both names are 
so common." 

To sum up, Alexander was probably by birth a 
North African Jew; he became a Christian, and 
was a well-known member of the church, probably 
the church in Rome. His chief claim to recollec- 
tion is that he was a son of the man who carried 
the cross of the Saviour of the world. 

(2) The second Alexander, referred to in Acts 4 6, 
was a relative of Annas the Jewish high priest. 

He is mentioned by Lk, as having 

2. A Rela- been present as a member of the San- 
tive of hedrin, before which Peter and Jn were 
Annas brought to be examined, for what they 

had done in the cure of the lame man 
at the gate of the temple.. Nothing more is known 
of this Alexander than is here given by Lk. It has 
been conjectured that he may have been the Alex- 
ander who was a brother of Philo, and who was also 
the alabarch or magistrate of the city of Alexan- 
dria. But this conjecture is unsupported by any 
evidence at all. 

(3) The third Alexander is mentioned in Acts 
19 33: "And some of the multitude instructed 

Alexander, the Jews putting him 

3. Alexan- forward. And Alexander beckoned 
der and the with the hand, and would have made a 
Riot at defence unto the people. But when 
Ephesus they perceived that he was a Jew, all 

with one voice," etc, RVm. In the 
matter of the riot in Ephesus the whole responsi- 
bility rested with Demetrius the silversmith. In 
his anger against the Christians generally, but 
specially against Paul, because of his successful 
preaching of the gospel, he called together a meet- 
ing of the craftsmen; the trade of the manufacture 
of idols was in jeopardy. From this meeting there 
arose the riot, in which the whole city was in com- 
motion. The Jews were wholly innocent in the 
matter: they had done nothing to cause any dis- 
turbance. But the riot had taken place, and no 
one could tell what would happen. Modern anti- 
Semitism, in Russia and other European countries, 
gives an idea of an excited mob stirred on by hatred 
of the Jews. Instantly recognizing that the fury 
of the Ephesian people might expend itself in 
violence and bloodshed, and that in that fury they 
would be the sufferers, the Jews "put forward" 
Alexander, so that by his sldll as a speaker he might 
clear them, either of having instigated the riot, or 
of being in complicity with Paul. "A certain 
Alexander was put forward by the Jews to address 
the mob; but this merely increased the clamor 
and confusion. There was no clear idea among 
the rioters what they wanted: an anti-Jewish and an 
anti-Christian demonstration were mixed up, and 
probably Alexander's intention was to turn the 
general feeling away from the Jews. It is possible 
that he was the worker in bronze, who afterward did 
Paul much harm" (Ramsay, St. Paul the Traveller, 
etc. 279). 

(4) The fourth of the NT Alexanders is one of 
two heretical teachers at Ephesus — ^the other being 

Hymenaeus: see art. s.v. — against 

4. Alexan- whom Paul warns Timothy in 1 Tim 1 
der an 19.20. The teaching of Hymenaeus 
Ephesian and Alexander was to the effect that 
Heretic Christian moraUty was not required 

— antinomianisra. They put away — 
"thrust from them," RV — ^faith and a good con- 




science; they wilfully abandoned the great central 
facts regarding Christ, and so they made ship- 
wreck concerning the faith. 

In 2 Tim 2 17.18, Hymenaeus is associated with 
Philetus, and further details are there given re- 
garding their false teaching. What 
6. His they taught is described by Paul as 

Heresy "profane babblings," as leading to more 

Incipient ungodliness, and as eating as doth 
Gnosticism a gangrene." Their heresy consisted 
in saying that the resurrection was 
past already, and it had been so far successful, 
that it had overthrown the faith of some. The 
doctrine of these three heretical teachers, Hy- 
menaeus, Alexander and Philetus, was accordingly 
one of the early forms of Gnosticism. It held that 
matter was originally and essentially evil; that for 
this reason the body was not an essential part of 
himaan nature; that the only resurrection was that 
of each man as he awoke from the death of sin to 
a righteous life; that thus in the case of everyone 
who has repented of sin, "the resurrection was past 
already," and that the body did not participate 
in the blessedness of the future life, but that salva- 
tion consisted in the soul's complete deliverance 
from all contact with a material world and a ma- 
terial body. 

So pernicious were these teachings of incipient 
Gnosticism in the Christian church, that they 
quickly spread, eating Uke a gangrene. The denial 
of the future resurrection of the body involved also 
the denial of the bodily resurrection of Christ, 
and even the fact of the incarnation. The way in 
which therefore the apostle dealt with those who 
taught such deadly error, was that he resorted to the 
same extreme measures as he had employed in the 
case of the immoral person at Corinth; he delivered 
Hymenaeus and Alexander to Satan, that they 
might learn not to blaspheme. Cf 1 Cor 5 5. 

(5) The fifth and last occurrence of the name 
Alexander is in 2 Tim 4 14.15, "Alexander the 
coppersmith did me much evil: the 
6. Alexan- Lord will render to him according to 
der the his works : of whom do thou also beware 

Copper- [AV "of whom be thou ware also"]: 
smith for he greatly withstood our words. 

This Alexander was a worker in copper 
or iron, a smith. It is quite uncertain whether 
Alexander no. 5 should be identified with A. no. 4, 
and even with A. no. 3. In regard to this, it should 
be remembered that all three of these Alexanders 
were resident in Ephesus; and it is specially to be 
noticed that the fourth and the fifth of that name 
resided in that city at much the same time; the 
interval between Paul's references to these two being 
not more than a year or two, as not more than that 
time elapsed between his writing 1 Tim and 2 
Tim. It is therefore quite possible these two 
Alexanders may be one and the same person. 

In any case, what is said of this last A. is that he 
had shown the evil which was in him by doing many 
evil deeds to the apostle, evidently on the occasion 
of a recent visit paid by Paul to Ephesus. These 
evil deeds had taken the form of personally oppos- 
ing the apostle's preaching. The personal antago- 
nism of Alexander manifested itself by his greatly 
withstanding the proclamation of the gospel by 
Paul. As Timothy was now in Ephesus, in charge 
of the church there, he is strongly cautioned by the 
apostle to be on his guard against this opponent. 

John Rtjtherfurd 

ALEXANDER BALAS, A. ba'las ('AX^govSpos 
6 BdXos X«v6|i«vos, AUxandros ho Bdlas legdme- 
nos): He contended against Demetrius I of Syria 
for the throne and succeeded in obtaining it. He 
was a youth of mean origin, but he was put forth 
by the enemies of Demetrius as being Alexander, 

the son and heir of Antiochus Epiphanes. He 
received the support of the Rom Senate and of 
Ptolemy VI of Egypt, and on account of the 
tyranny of Demetrius, was favored by many of the 
Syrians. The country was thrown into civil war 
and Demetrius was defeated by Alexander in 150 
BC and was killed in battle. Demetrius II took 
up the cause of his father and in 147 BC, Alexander 
fled from his kingdom and was soon after assas- 

Our chief interest in Alexander is his connection 
with the Maccabees. Jonathan was the leader of 
the Maccabean forces and both Alexander and 

Tetradrachm (Ptolemaic talent) of Alexander Balas. 

Demetrius sought his aid. Demetrius granted 
Jonathan the right to raise and maintain an army. 
Alexander, not to be outdone, appointed Jonathan 
high priest, and as a token of his new office sent 
him a purple robe and a diadem {Ant, XIII, ii, 2). 
This was an important step in the rise of the Mac- 
cabean house, for it insured them the support of 
the Chasidim. In 153 BC, Jonathan oflBciated as 
high priest at the altar (1 Mace 10 1-14; Ant, 
XIII, ii, 1). This made him the legal head of 
Judaea and thus the movement of the Maccabees 
became closely identified with Judaism. In 1 Mace 
10 1, he is called Alexander Epiphanes. 

A. W. Fortune 
AUxandros): Alexander, of Macedon, commonly 
called "the Great" (b. 356 BC), was 
1. Parent- the son of Phihp, king of Macedon, 
age and and of Olympias, daughter of Neop- 
Early Life tolemos, an Epeirote king. Although 
Alexander is not mentioned by name 
in the canonical Scriptures, in Dnl he is designated 
by a transparent symbol (8 5.21). In 1 Mace 1 1 
he is expressly named as the overthrower of the 
Pers empire, and the founder of that of the Greeks. 
As with Frederick the Great, the career of Alex- 
ander would have been impossible had his father 
been other than he was. PhUip had been for some 
years a hostage in Thebes: while there he had 
learned to appreciate the changes introduced into 
miUtary disciphne and tactics by Epaminondas. 
Partly no doubt from the family claim to Herac- 
leid descent, deepened by contact in earlier days with 
Athenians like Iphicrates, and the personal influ- 
ence of Epaminondas, PhiUp seems to have united 
to his admiration for Gr tactics a tincture of Hel 
culture, and something like a reverence for Athens, 
the great center of this culture. In military matters 
his admiration led him to introduce the Theban 
discipline to the rough peasant levies of Macedon, 
and the Macedonian phalanx proved the most 
formidable military weapon that had yet been de- 
vised. The veneer of Gr culture which he had 
taken on led him, on the one hand, laying stress 
on his Hel descent, to claim admission to the comity 
of Hellas, and on the other, to appoint Aristotle to 
be a tutor to his son. By a combination of force 
and fraud, favored by circumstances, PhiUp got 
himself appointed generalissimo of the Hel states; 




and further induced them to proclaim war against 
the "Great King." In all this he was preparing 
the way for his son, so soon to be his successor. 

He was also preparing his son for his career. 

Alexander was, partly no doubt from being the 

pupil of Aristotle, yet more imbued 

2. His with Gr feelings and ideas than was 
Preparation his father. He was early introduced 
for His into the cares of government and the 
Career practice of war. While Philip was 

engaged in the siege of Byzantium he 
sent his son to replace Antipater in the regency; 
during his occupancy of this post, Alexander, then 
only a youth of sixteen, had to undertake a cam- 
paign against the lUjoians, probably a punitive 
expedition. Two years later, at the decisive battle 
of Chaeroneia, which fixed the doom of the Gr 
autonomous city, Alexander commanded the feudal 
cavalry of Macedon, the "Companions." He not 
only saved his father's life, but by his timely and 
vehement charge materially contributed to the 

When all his plans for the invasion of Persia 
were complete, and a portion of his troops was 

already across the Hellespont, Philip 

3. His was assassinated. Having secured his 
Accession succession, Alexander proceeded to 
to the Corinth, where he was confirmed in 
Hegemony his father's position of leader of Hellas 
of Greece against Darius. Before he could cross 

into Asia he had to secure his northern 
frontier against possible raids of barbarian tribes. 
He invaded Thrace with his army and overthrew 
the Triballi, then crossed the Danube and inflicted 
a defeat on the Getae. During his absence in these 
but slightly known regions, the rumor spread that 
he had been killed, and Thebes began a movement 
to throw off the Macedonian yoke. On his return 
to Greece he wreaked terrible vengeance on Thebes, 
not only as promoter of this revolt, but also as the 
most powerful of the Gr states. 

Having thus secured his rear, Alexander collected 
his army at Pella to cross the Hellespont, that he 

might exact the vengeance of Greece 

4. Cam- on Persia for indignities suffered at 
paign in the hands of Xerxes, who "by his 
Asia Minor strength through his riches" had stirred 

up "all against the realm of Grecia" 
(Dnl 112 AV) . Steeped as he was in the romance of 
the Iliad, Alexander, when he came to the site of 
Troy, honored Achilles, whom he claimed as his 
ancestor, with games and sacrifices. This may 
have been the outflow of his own romantic nature, 
but there was also wise policy in it; the Greeks were 
more readily reconciled to the loss of their freedom 
when it was yielded up to one who revived in his 
own person the heroes of the Iliad. It may be 
noted how exactly the point of Alexander's in- 
vasion is indicated in Daniel's prophecy (8 5). 
From Troy he advanced southward, and encoun- 
tered the Pers forces at the Granicus. While 
in the conflict Alexander exhibited all the reckless 
bravery of a Homeric hero. He at the same time 
showed the skUl of a consummate general. The 
Pers army was dispersed with great slaughter. 
Before proceeding farther into Persia, by rapid 
marches and vigorously pressed sieges, he com- 
pleted the conquest of Asia Minor. Here, too, he 
showed his knowledge of the sensitiveness of 
Asiatic peoples to omens, by visiting Gordium, and 
cutting the knot on which, according to legend, 
depended the empire of Asia. 

What he had done in symbol he had to make a 
reality; he had to settle the question of supremacy 
in Asia by the sword. He learned that Darius 
had collected an immense army and was coming 
to meet him. Although the Pers host was esti- 

mated at a half-million men, Alexander hastened 
to encounter it. Rapidity of motion, as symbolized 

in Dnl by the "he-goat" that "came 
6. Battle of from the west .... and touched 
Issus and not the ground" (Dnl 8 5), was Alex- 
March ander's great characteristic. The two 
through armies met in the relatively narrow 
Syria to plain of Issus, where the Persians lost, 
Egypt to a great extent, the advantage of 

their numbers; they were defeated with 
tremendous slaughter, Darius himself setting the 
example of flight. Alexander only pursued the de- 
feated army far enough to break it up utterly. He 
began his march southward along the seacoast of 
Syria toward Egypt, a country that had always im- 
pressed the Gr imagination. Though most of the 
cities, on his march, opened their gates to the con- 
queror. Tyre and Gaza only yielded after a prolonged 
siege. In the case of the latter of these, enraged 
at the delay occasioned by the resistance, and emu- 
lous of his ancestor, Alexander dragged its gallant 
defender Batis alive behind his chariot as Achilles 
had dragged the dead Hector. It ought to be noted 
that this episode does not appear in Arrian, usually 
regarded as the most authentic historian of Alex- 
ander. Josephus relates that after he had taken 
Gaza, Alexander went up to Jerus, and saw Jad- 
dua the high priest, who showed him the prophecy 
of Daniel concerning him. The fact that none of 
the classic historians take any notice of such a 
detour renders the narrative doubtful : still it con- 
tains no element of improbabihty that the pupil 
of Aristotle, in the pursuit of knowledge, rnight, 
during the prosecution of the siege of Gaza, with 
a small company press into the hill country of 
Judaea, at once to secure the submission of Jeru- 
salem which occupied a threatening position in 
regard to his communications, and to see something 
of that mysterious nation who worshipped one God 
and had no idols. 

When he entered Egypt, the whole country sub- 
mitted without a struggle. Moved at once by the 

fact that Pharos is mentioned in the 
6. Found- Odyssey, and that he could best rule 
ing of Alex- Egypt from the seacoast, he founded 
andria and Alexandria on the strip of land oppo- 
Visit to the site Pharos, which separated Lake 
Shrine of Mareotis from the Mediterranean. 
Jupiter The island Pharos formed a natural 

Ammon breakwater which made possible a 

spacious double harbor; the lake, 
communicating with the Nile, opened the way for 
inland navigation. As usual with Alexander, 
romance and pohcy went hand in hand. The city 
thus founded became the capital of the Ptolemies, 
and the largest city of the Hel world. He spent 
his time visiting shrines, in the intervals of arrang- 
ing for the govermnent of the country. The most 
memorable event of his stay in Egypt was his 
expedition to the oracle of Jupiter Ammon (Amen- 
Ra) where he was declared the son of the god. To 
the Egjrptians this meant no more than that he was 
regarded a lawful monarch, but he pretended to 
take this declaration as assigning to him a Divine 
origin Uke so many Homeric heroes. Hencefor- 
ward there appeared on coins Alexander's head 
adorned with the ram's horn of Amen-Ra. This 
impressed the eastern imagination so deeply that 
Mohammed, a thousand years after, calls him in 
the Quran Iskander dhu al-qarnain, "Alexander 
the lord of the two horns." It is impossible to 
believe that the vwiter of Dnl could, in the face 
of the universal attribution of the two ram's 
horns to Alexander, represent Persia, the power 
he overthrew, as a two-horned ram (Dnl 8 3.20), 
unless he had written before the expedition into 




Having arranged the affairs of Egypt, Alexander 
set out for his last encounter with Darius. In vain 
had Darius sent to Alexander offering 
7. The Last to share the empire with him; the 
Battle with "king of Javan" (RVm) "was moved 
Darius with anger against him" (Dnl 8 7) and 

would have nothing but absolute 
submission. There was nothing left for Darius but 
to prepare for the final conflict. He collected a yet 
huger host than that he had had under him at 
Issus, and assembled it on the plain east of the 
Tigris. Alexander hastened to meet him. Al- 
though the plain around Gaugamela was much more 
suitable for the movements of the Pers troops, which 
consisted largely of cavalry, and gave them better 
opportunity of making use of their great numerical 
superiority to outflank the small Gr army, the result 
was the same as at Issus — overwhelming defeat 
and immense slaughter. The consequence of this 
victory was the submission of the greater portion 
of the Pers empire. 

After making some arrangements for the govern- 
ment of the new provinces, Alexander set out in the 
pursuit of Darius, who had fled in the care or cus- 
tody of Bessus, satrap of Bactria. Bessus, at last, 
to gain the favor of Alexander, or, failing that, to 
maintain a more successful resistance, murdered 
Darius. Alexander hurried on to the conquest 
of Bactria and Sogdiana, in the course of his expe- 
dition capturing Bessus and putting him to death. 
In imitation of Bacchus, he proceeded now to invade 
India. He conquered all before him till he reached 
the Sutlej; at this point his Macedonian veterans 
refused to follow him farther. 

Thus compelled to give up hopes of conquests 

in the farther East, he returned to Babylon, which 

he purposed to make the supreme 

8. Close of capital of his empire, and set himself, 
His Life with all his superabundant energy, to 

organize his dominions, and fit Baby- 
lon for its new destiny. While engaged in this 
work he was seized with malaria, which, aggravated 
by his recklessness in eating and drinking, carried 
him off in his 33d year. 

Alexander is not to be estimated merely as a 
military conqueror. If he had been only this, he 

would have left no deeper impress on 

9. His the world than Tamerlane or Attila. 
Influence While he conquered Asia, he endeav- 
ored also to Hellenize her. He every- 
where founded Gr cities that enjoyed at all events 
a municipal autonomy. With these, Hel thought 
and the Hel language were spread all over south- 
western Asia, so that philosophers from the banks 
of the Euphrates taught in the schools of Athens. 
It was through the conquests of Alexander that Gr 
became the language of Uterature and commerce 
from the shores of the Mediterranean to the banks 
of the Tigris. It is impossible to estimate the 
effect of this spread of Gr on the promulgation of 
the gospel. J- E. H. Thomson 

ALEXANDRIA, al-eg-zan'dri-a (r\ 'AXe^iivSpeia, 

he Alexdndreia) : In 331 BC, Alexander the Great, 
on his way to visit the Oracle of 
1. History Amon seeking divine honors, stopped 
at the W. extremity of the Delta at the 
isle of Pharos the landing-place of Odysseus {Od. 
iv.35) His keen eye noted the strategc possi- 
bilities of the site occupied by the little Egyptian 
village of Rhacotis, and his decision was immediate 
to erect here, where it would command the gateway 
to the richest domain of his empire, a glorious city 
to be called by his own name. Deinocrates, great- 
est living architect, abeady famous as builder of 
the Temple of Diana, was given free hand and 
like a dream the most beautiful city of the ancient 

or modern world (with the single exception of Rome) 
arose with straight, parallel streets — one at least 
200 feet wide — ^with fortresses, monuments, palaces, 
government buildings, and parks all erected accord- 
ing to a perfect artistic plan. The city was about 
fifteen miles in circumference (Pliny), and when 
looked at from above represented a Macedonian 
cloak, such as was worn by Alexander's heroic 
ancestors. A colossal mole joined the island to 
the main land and made a double harbor, the best 
in all Egypt. Before Alexander died (323 BC) 
the future of the city as the commercial metropolis 
of the world was assured and here the golden casket 
of the conqueror was placed in a fitting mausoleum. 
Under the protection of the first two Ptolemies and 
Euergetes A. reached its highest prosperity, receiving 
through Lake Mareotis the products of Upper 
Egypt, reaching by the Great Sea all the wealth 
of the West, while through the Red Sea its merchant 
vessels brought all the treasures of India and 
Arabia into the A. docks without once being un- 
laden. The manufactories of A. were extensive, the 
greatest industry however being shipbuilding, the 
largest merchant ships of the world and battle- 
ships capable of carrying 1,000 men, which could 
hurl fire with fearful effect, being constructed here. 
This position of supremacy was maintained during 
the Rom domination up to the 5th cent, during 
which A. began to decline. Yet even when A. 
was captured by the Arabs (641) under the caliph 
Omar, the general could report: "I have taken a 
city containing 4,000 palaces and 4,000 baths and 
400 theaters." They called it a "city of marble" 
and beheved the colossal obelisks, standing on 
crabs of crystal, and the Pharos, that white stone 
tower 400 ft. high, "wonder of the world," to be the 
creation of jinn, not of men. With oriental exag- 
geration they declared that one amphitheater 
could easily hold a million spectators and that 
it was positively painful to go upon the streets at 
night because of the glare of light reflected from the 
white palaces. But with the coming of the Arabs 
A. began to decline. It sank lower when Cairo 
became the capital (cir 1000 AD), and received 
its death blow when a sea route to India was 
discovered by way of the Cape of Good Hope 
(cir 1500). Today the ancient A. lies entirely 
under the sea or beneath some later construction. 
Only one important relic remains visible, the 
60-caUed Pompey's Pillar which dates from the 
reign of Diocletian. Excavations by the English 
(1895) and Germans (1898-99) have yielded few 
results, though Dr. G. Botti discovered the Sera- 
peum and some immense catacombs, and only 
recently (1907) some fine sphinxes. In its most 
flourishing period the population numbered from 
600,000 to 800,000, half of whom were perhaps 
slaves. At the close of the 18th cent, it num- 
bered no more than 7,000. Under the khedives 
it has recently gained something of its old im- 
portance and numbers now 320,000, of whom 46,000 
are Europeans, chiefly Greeks (Baedeker, Handbook, 
1902; Murray, Handbook, 1907). 

Among the private papers of Alexander it is 
said a sketch was found outlining his vast plan of 
making a Greek empire which should 
2. The include all races as harmonious units. 

Jews in In accordance with this, Europeans, 
Alexandria Asiatics and Africans found in A. a 
common citizenship. Indeed in sever- 
al cities, under the Ptolemies, who accepted this 
policy, foreigners were even given superiority 
to natives. Egyptians and Greeks were con- 
ciliated by the introduction of a syncretic religion 
in which the greatest Gr god was worshipped as 
Osiris, Egyp god of the underworld, whose soul 
appeared visibly in the form of the Apis bull. This 




was the most popular and human form of the Egyp 
worship. This new religion obtained phenomenal 
success. It was in furtherance of this general 
poUcy that the Jews in A. were given special 
privileges, and though probably not possessing full 
civic rights, yet they "occupied in A. a more in- 
fluential position than anywhere else in the ancient 
world" {Jew Enc). To avoid unnecessary friction 
a separate district was given to the Jews, another to 
the Greeks and another to the native Egyptians. 
In the Gr section were situated the palaces of the 
Ptolemies, the Library and Museum. In the 
Egyp district was the temple dedicated to Serapis 
(Osiris-Apis) which was only excelled in grandeur 
by the capitol at Rome. The Jews possessed many 
synagogues in their own district and in Philo's 
day these were not confined to any one section of 
the city. Some synagogues seem to have exercised 
the right of asylum, the same as heathen temples. 

nate the first week in Lent as the "Fast of Herac- 
lius." Wisd and many other influential writings 
of the Jews originated in A. Doubtless numbers 
of the recently discovered documents from the 
Cairo g'nizah came originally from A. But the 
epochal importance of A. is found in the teaching 
which prepared the Heb people for the reception of 
a gospel for the whole world, which was soon to be 
preached by Hebrews from HeUenized Galilee. 

(1) In Dnl 11 the Ptolemies of A. and their 
wives are made a theme of prophecy. Apollos, 

the "orator," was born in A. (Acts 18 
3. Alexan- 24). Luke twice speaks of himself and 
dria's Influ- Paul saihng in "a ship of A." (Acts 
ence on the 27 6; 28 11). Stephen 'disputed' in 
Bible Jerusalem in the synagogue of the 

Alexandrians (Acts 6 9). These direct 
references are few, but the influence of A. on the 
Bible was inestimable. 

One of these was so large that the hazan signaled by 
a flag when the congregation should give the Amen! 
Each district had a practically independent politi- 
cal government. The Jews were at first ruled by a 
Heb ethnarch. By the days of Augustus a Council 
of Elders {gerusia) had control, presided over by 
71 archons. Because of their wealth, education 
and social position they reached high public office. 
Under Ptol. VI and Cleopatra the two generals- 
in-chief of the royal army were Jews. Ptol. I 
had 30,000 Jewish soldiers in his army, whose 
barracks have only recently been discovered. It 
may have been a good thing that the persecu- 
tion of Antiochus Epiphanes (2d cent. BC) checked 
Jewish HeUenization. During the Rom supremacy 
the rights of the Jews were maintained, except 
during their persecution for a brief period by the 
insane Caligula, and the control of the most im- 
portant industries, including the corn trade, came 
into their hands. When Christianity became the 
state rehgion of Egypt the Jews at once began to 
be persecuted. The victory of Heraclius over the 
Persians (629 AD) was followed by such a massacre 
of the Jews that the Copts of Egypt still denomi- 

(2) The Sept, tr'* in A. (3d to 2d cent. BC), 
preserves a Heb text 1,000 years older than any 
now known. This tr if not used by Jesus was 
certainly used by Paul and other NT writers, as 
shown by their quotations. It is Egyp even in 
trifles. This Gr Bible not only opened for the 
first time the "Divine Oracles" to the Gentiles and 
thus gave to the OT an international influence, but 
it affected most vitally the Heb and Christian de- 

(3) The Alex Codex (4th to 5th cent.) was 
the first of all the great uncials to come into the 
hands of modern scholars. It was obtained in 
A. and sent as a present to the king of England 
(1628) by Cyrellus Lucaris, the Patriarch of Con- 
stantinople. The Sin and Vatican uncials with 
many other most important Bible MSS — Heb, Gr, 
Coptic and Syr — came from A. 

(4) Jn and several other NT writings have justly 
been regarded as showing the influence of this 
philosophic city. Neither the phraseology nor 
conceptions of the Fourth Gospel could have been 
grasped in a world which A. had not taught. Pflei- 
derer's statement that He "may be termed the most 




finished treatise of the A. philosophy" may be 
doubted, but no one can doubt the fact of Alex in- 
fluence on the NT. 

With the founding of the University of A. began 
the "third great epoch in the history of civiliza- 
tion" (Max Miiller). It was modeled 
4. Influence after the great school of Athens, but 
of Alexan- excelled, being preeminently the "uni- 
dria on versity of progress" (Mahaffy). Here 

Culture for the first time is seen a school of 

science and hterature, adequately 
endowed and offering large facihties for definite 
original research. The famous library which at 
different eras was reported as possessing from 
400,000 to 900,000 books and rolls— the rolls being 
as precious as the books — ^was a magnificent edifice 
connected by marble colonnades with the Museum, 
the "Temple of the Muses." An observatory, an 
anatomical laboratory and large botanical and 
zoological gardens were available. Celebrated 
scholars, members of the various faculties, were 
domiciled within the halls of the Museum and 
received stipends or salaries from the government. 
The study of mathematics, astronomy, poetry 
and medicine was especially favored (even vivi- 
section upon criminals being common); Alex archi- 
tects were sought the world over; Alex inventors 
were almost equally famous; the influence of Alex 
art can still be marked in Pompeii and an Alex 
painter was a hated rival of Apelles. Here Euclid 
wrote his Elements of Geometry; here Archimedes, 
"that greatest mathematical and inventive genius 
of antiquity," made his spectacular discoveries 
in hydrostatics and hydraulics; here Eratosthenes 
calculated the size of the earth and made his other 
memorable discoveries; while Ptolemy studied here 
for 40 years and published an explanation of the 
stellar universe which was accepted by scientists 
for 14 cents., and established mathematical theories 
which are yet the basis of trigonometry. "Ever 
since this epoch the conceptions of the sphericity 
of the earth, its poles, axis, the equator, the arctic 
and antarctic circles, the equinoctial points, the sol- 
stices, the inequality of climate on the earth's 
surface, have been current notions among scientists. 
The mechanism of the lunar phases was perfectly 
understood, and careful though not wholly suc- 
cessful calculations were made of inter-sidereal 
distances. On the other hand literature and art 
flourished under the careful protection of the court. 
Literature and its history, philology and criticism 
became sciences" (A. Weber). It may be claimed 
that in literature no special originality was dis- 
played though the earliest "love stories" and pas- 
toral poetry date from this period (Mahaffy); 
yet the literature of the Augustan Age cannot be 
understood "without due appreciation of the char- 
acter of the Alex school" {EB, 11th ed), while in 
editing texts and in copying and translating Mbb 
inconceivable patience and erudition were dis- 
played. Our authorized texts of Homer and 
other classic writers come from A. not from Athens. 
All famous books brought into Egypt were sent 
to the library to be copied. The statement of Jos 
that Ptolemy Philadelphus (285-247) requested 
the Jews to translate the OT into Gr is not in- 
credible. It was in accordance with the custom of 
that era. Ptol. Euergetes is said to have sent to 
Athens for the works of Aeschylus, Sophocles, 
Euripides, etc, and when these were transcribed, 
sent back beautiful copies to Greece and kept the 
origmals! No library in the world excepting the 
prophetic library in Jerusalem was ever as valuable 
as the two Alex libraries. The story that the 
Arabs burned it in the 7th cent, is discredited 
and seemingly disproved (Butler). At any rate 
after this period we hear of great private libraries 

in A., but the greatest literary wonder of the world 
has disappeared. 

Though no department of philosophy was estab- 
lished in the Museum, nevertheless from the 3d 
cent. BC to the 6th cent. AD it was 

5. Influence the center of gravity in the philo- 
on Philos- sophic world. Here Neo-Pythagorean- 
ophy ism arose. Here Neo-Platonism, that 

contemplative and mystical reaction 
against the materialism of the Stoics, reached its 
full flower. It is difficult to overestimate the in- 
fluence of the latter upon religious thought. In it 
the profoundest Aryan speculations were blended 
with the sublimest Sem concepts. Plato was 
numbered among the prophets. Greece here ac- 
knowledged the Divine Unity to which the OT was 
pledged. Here the Jew acknowledged that Athens 
as truly as Jerusalem had taught a vision of God. 
This was the first attempt to form a universal 
rehgion. The Alex philosophy was the Elijah to 
prepare the way for a Saviour of the world. The 
thought of both Sadducee and Pharisee was affected 
by it and much late pre-Christian Jewish lit. is 
saturated with it. Neo-Platonism drew attention 
to the true relation between matter and spirit, 
good and evil, finite and infinite; it showed the 
depth of antagonism between the natural and 
spiritual, the real and ideal; it proclaimed the 
necessity of some mystic union between the human 
and the Divine. It stated but could not solve the 
problem. Its last word was escape, not recon- 
cihation (Ed. Caird). Neo-Platonism was the 
"germ out of which Christian theology sprang" 
(Caird) though later it became an adverse force. 
Notwithstanding its dangerous teaching concern- 
ing evil, it was on the whole favorable to piety, 
being the forerunner of mysticism and sympathetic 
with the deepest, purest elements of a spiritual 

According to all tradition St. Mark, the evangel- 
ist, carried the gospel to A., and his body rested 
here until removed to Venice, 828 AD. 

6. Christian From this city Christianity reached 
Church in all Egypt and entered Nubia, Ethiopia 
Alexandria and Abyssinia. During the 4th cent. 

ten councils were held in A., it 
being the theological and ecclesiastical center of 
Christendom. The first serious persecution of 
Christians by heathen occurred here under Decius 
(251) and was followed by many others, the one 
under Diocletian (303-11) being so savage that 
the native Coptic church still dates its era from it. 
When the Christians reached pohtical power they 
used the same methods of controversy, wrecking 
the Caesarion in 366 and the Serapeum twenty- 
five years later. Serapis (Osiris-Apis) was the best 
beloved of all the native deities. His temple was 
built of most precious marbles and filled with price- 
less sculptures, while in its cloisters was a library 
second only to the Great Library of the Museum. 
When Christianity became the state rehgion of 
Egypt the native philosophers, moved by patriotism, 
raUied to the support of Serapis. But Theodosius 
(391) prohibited idolatry, and led by the bishop, the 
Serapeum was seized, and smitten by a soldier's 
battle-axe, the image— which probably represented 
the old heathen religion at its best — was broken 
to pieces, and dragged through the streets. That 
day, as Steindorff well puts it, "Egyp paganism 
received its death blow; the Egyp religion fell to 
pieces" (History of Egypt). Thereafter heathen 
worship hid itself in the dens and caves of the 
earth. Even secret allegiance to Serapis brought 
persecution and sometimes death. The most 
appalhng tragedy of this kind occurred in 415 when 
Hypatia, the virgin philosopher, celebrated equally 
for beauty, virtue and learning, was dragged by 




a mob to the cathedral, stripped, and torn to pieces 
before the altar. Some of the greatest Christian 
leaders used all their influence against such atroci- 
ties, but the Egyp Christians were always noted for 
their excitability. They killed heretics easily, 
but they would themselves be killed rather than 
renounce the very slightest and most intangible 
theological tenet. It only needed the change of 
a word e.g. in the customary version to raise a riot 
(Expos, VII, 75) . Some curious relics of the early 
Egyp church have very recently come to hght. 
The oldest autographic Christian letter known 
(3d cent.) proves that at that time the church 
was used as a bank, and its ecclesiastics (who, 
whether priests or bishops, were called "popes") 
were expected to help the country merchants in 
their deahngs with the Rom markets. Some sixty 
letters of the 4th cent, written to a Christian cavalry 
officer in the Egyp army are also preserved, while 
papyri and ostraca from cir 600 AD show that 
at this time no deacon could be ordained with- 
out having first learned by heart as much as an 
entire Gospel or 25 Pss and two epistles of Paul, 
while a letter from a bishop of this period is filled 
with Scripture, as he anathematizes the "oppressor 
of the poor," who is Hkened unto him who spat 
in the face of Our Lord on the cross and smote 
Him on the head (Adolph Deissmann, Light from 
the Ancient East, etc, 1910). Oppression of Jews 
and heretics was not, however, forbidden and during 
the 5th and 6th cents. Egypt was a battle-field in 
which each sect persecuted every other. Even 
when the Arabs under the caUph Omar captured 
the city on Good Friday (641), Easter Day was 
spent by the orthodox in torturing supposed here- 
tics! The next morning the city was evacuated 
and Jews and Copts received better treatment from 
the Arabs than they had from the Rom or Gr 
ecclesiastics. After the Arab conquest the Coptic 
church, being released from persecution, pros- 
pered and gained many converts even from the 
Mohammedans. But the Saracenic civilization 
and religion steadily displaced the old, and the 
native learning and native religion soon disappeared 
into the desert. By the 8th cent. Arab, had taken 
the place of Gr and Coptic, not only in pubhc 
documents but in common speech. Then for 
1,000 years the Egyp church remained without 
perceptible influence on culture or theology. But 
its early influence was immeasurable and can still 
be marked in Christian art, architecture and ritual 
as well as in philosophy and theology. Perhaps 
its most visible influence was in the encourage- 
ment of image-reverence and asceticism. It is 
suggestive that the first hermit (Anthony) was a 
native Egyp, and the first founder of a convent 
(Pachomius) was a converted Egyp (heathen) monk. 
Today A. has again become a Christian metropolis 
containing Copts, Romans, Greeks, Armenians, 
Maronites, Syrians, Chaldaeans and Protestants. 
The Protestants are represented by the Anglican 
church, the Scotch Free church, the evangehcal 
church of Germany and the United Presbyterian 
church of the U.S. (For minute divisions see 
Catholic Enc.) 

The first theological school of Christendom was 
founded in A. It was probably modeled after 

earlier Gnostic schools estabhshed for 
7. Catechet- the study of religious philosophy, 
ical School It offered a three years' course. There 
in Alexan- were no fees, the lecturers being sup- 
dria ported by gifts from rich students. 

Pantaenus, a converted Stoic philoso- 
pher, was its first head (180). He was followed by 
Clement (202) and by Origen (232) under whom the 
school reached its zenith. It always stood for the 
philosophical vindication of Christianity. Among 

its greatest writers were Julius Africanus (215), 
Dionysius (265), Gregory (270), Eusebius (315), 
Athanasius (373) and Didymus (347), but Origen 
(185-254) was its chief glory; to him belongs the 
honor of defeating paganism and Gnosticism with 
their own weapons," he gave to the church a "scien- 
tific consciousness," his threefold interpretation 
of Scripture affected Biblical exegesis clear down 
to the last century. Arius was a catechist in this 
institution, and Athanasius, the "father of ortho- 
doxy" and "theological center of the Nicene age" 
(Schaff), though not officially connected with the 
catechetical school was greatly affected by it, having 
been bred and trained in A. The school was closed 
toward the end of the 4th cent, because of theological 
disturbances in Egypt, but its work was continued 
from Caesarea and other centers, affecting profoundly 
Western teachers like Jerome and Ambrose, and com- 
pletely dominating Eastern thought. From the first 
there was a mystical and Docetic tendency visible, 
while its views of inspiration and methods of inter- 
pretation, including its constant assumption of a 
secret doctrine for the qualified initiate, came legiti- 
mately from Neo-Platonism. For several centuries 
after the school disbanded its tenets were combated 
by the "school of Antioch," but by the 8th cent, the 
Alex theology was accepted by the whole Christian 
world, east and west. 

Literature. — Besides works mentioned in the text 
see especially: Petrie, History of Egypt (1899), V, VI; 
Mahaffy, Empire oj the Ptolemies (1895); Progress of 
Hellenism (1905); Butler, Arab Conquest of Egypt (1902;; 
Ernst Sieglin, Ausgrabungen in Alexandrien (1908)', Har- 
nack, Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte (1895-1900), and in 
New Sch-Herz (1910); Inge, Alexandrian Theology in 
Enc of Religion and Ethics (1908j; Ed. Caird, Evolution 
of Theology in the Greek Philosophers (1904); Pfleiderer, 
Philosophy and Development of Religion (1894); Schafl, 
History of Christian Church (1884-1910) ; Zogheb, Studes 
sur Vancienne Alexandrie (1909). 

Camden M. Cobern 
ALEXANDRIANS, al-eg-zan'dri-ans ('AXegav- 
Spcts, Alexandreis) : Jews of Alexandria, who had, 
with the Libertines and Cyrenians, a synagogue in 
Jerusalem. They were among those who disputed 
with Stephen (Acts 6 9). 

ALGUM, al'gum (ni'52'a>X , 'algUmmlm [2 Ch 2 
8; 9 lOf]; or ALMUG [D-iJ^bS!, 'almuggim, 
1 K 10 11 f]): It is generally supposed that these 

Algum Tree — Santalum album. 

two names refer to one kind of tree, the consonants 
being transposed as is not uncommon in Sem words. 
Solomon sent to Hiram, king of Tyre, saying, 
"Send me also cedar-trees, fir-trees, and algum-trees, 




out of Lebanon" (2 Ch 2 8). In 1 K 10 11 it 
is said that the navy of Hiram "that brought gold 
from Ophir, brought in from Ophir great plenty of 
alraug-trees and precious stones." In the parallel 
passage in 2 Ch 9 10 it is said that "algum-trees and 
precious stones" were brought. From this wood 
"the king made .... pillars for the house of Jeh, 
and for the king's house, harps also and psalteries 
for the singers: there came no such almug-trees, 
nor were seen, unto this day" (1 K 10 12). The 
wood was evidently very precious and apparently 
came from E. Asia — unless we suppose from 2 Ch 
2 8 that it actually grew on Lebanon, which is 
highly improbable; it was evidently a fine, close- 
grained wood, suitable for carving. Tradition 
says that this was the famous sandal wood, which 
was in ancient times put to similar uses in India 
and was all through the ages highly prized for its 
color, fragrance, durabihty and texture. It is 
the wood of a tree, Pterocar pitssantalinus (N.D. 
Santalaceae), which grows to a height of 25 to 30 
feet; it is a native of the mountains of Malabar. 
E. W. G. Masterman 
ALIAH, a-li'a (H^b? , ^alyah) : One of the dukes, 
or heads of thousands of Edom (1 Ch 1 51). 
In Gen 36 40 the name is Alvah (nib?, ^alwah), 
the only difference being the change of the weaker 
1, y, of Gen to the somewhat stronger, "', y, of 
the later Ch, a change which is not infrequent in 
Heb. He is not to be confused, as in HDB, with 
the Allan of the same chapter. 

ALIAN, a-li'an (l^'by , '■alyan) : A descendant of 
Esau, and son of Shobal (1 Ch 1 40). In the cor- 
responding earMer genealogy (Gen 36 23) the same 
person is given as Alvan ("15? , 'alwan), the change 
of the third consonant being a simple one, common 
to Heb, occurring similarly in Allah (q.v.). Allan 
is not to be identified with Aliah, since the groups 
of names in which these occur are quite different, 
and the context in each case is not the same. 

ALIEN, al'yen: Found in the AV for 13, ger, 
(Ex 18 3) = "guest," hence: "foreigner," "so- 
journer" RV; also for "132, nekhar (Isa 61 5) = 
"foreign," "a foreigner" RV (concrete), "heathen- 
dom" (abstract), "ahen," "strange" (-er); and for 
i-)p;, nokhri (Dt 14 21 RV "foreigner"; cf Job 
19'i5; Ps 69 8; Lam 5 2) — "strange, "in a variety 
of degrees and meanings: "foreign," "non-relative," 
"adulterous," "different," "wonderful," "ahen," 
"outlandish," "strange." In the NT we find dirv^- 
'KoTpiaiJ.ivos, apeHolriom&nos (Eph 4 18; Col 1 21) 
= "being ahenated," and alldtrios (He 11 34) = 
"another's," "not one's own," hence: "foreign," 
"not akin," "hostile." In the OT the expression 
was taken in its Ut. sense, referring to those who were 
not Israelites — the heathen; in the NT it is given a 
fig. meaning, as indicating those who have not be- 
come naturalized in the kmgdom of God, hence are 
outside of Christ and the blessing of the gospel. 

Frank E. Hirsch 

ALIENATE, al'yen-at ("15? , 'dbhar; dwaWoTptio), 
a-pallotrioo, "to estrange from"): In OT, for the 
break between husband and wife caused by unfaith- 
fulness to the marriage vow (Jer 6 8; Ezk 23 17); 
also apphed to the diversion of property (Ezk 48 
14). In NT, spiritually, for the turning of the soul 
from God (Eph 2 12; Col 1 21). The Gr oZZdfrios, 
which is the root of the verb, is the opposite of id- 
i-os, "one's own." The word implies a former state, 
whence the person or thing has departed, and that, 
generally, by deterioration. 

ALIVE, a-llv' Cn, hai, "hving"; l&a, zdo, "to 
live/.' dvojdu, anazdo, "to live again"): These 

Heb and Gr originals are the chief terms for life in 
both Testaments. They cover all life, including 
soul and spirit, although primarily referring to 
physical vitahty. Striking examples may be cited: 
'Ts your father yet a.?" (Gen 43 7); "To whom 
he also showed himself a." (Acts 1 3). Often used 
of God: "the living God" (Josh 3 10); also of the 
resurrection hfe: "In Christ shall all be made a." 
(1 Cor 15 22); of the soul's regenerate life: 

"Reckon .... yourselves a. unto God," "as 

those that are a. from the dead" (Rom 6 11.13 AV). 
The term is vital with the creative energy of God; 
the healing, redemptive, resurrection life of Christ; 
the renewing and recreative power of the Holy 
Spirit. DwiQHT M. Pratt 

ALL, 61: Used in various combinations, and with 
different meanings. 

(1) All along, "Weeping all along as he went" 
(Jer 41 6), i.e. throughout the whole way he went, 
feigning equal concern with the men from Shiloh, 
etc, for the destruction of' the Temple, so as to put 
them off their guard. 

(2) All in all, "That God may be all in all" 
(1 Cor 15 28, Gr pdnta en pdsin, "all things in all 
[persons and] things"). "The universe, with all it 
comprises, will wholly answer to God's will and re- 
flect His mind" (Dummelow). 

(3) All one, "It is all one" (Job 9 22), "it makes 
no difference whether I live or die." 

(4) At all, "If thy father miss me at all" (1 S 
20 6), "in any way,*^' "in the least." 

(5) All to, "All to brake his skull" (Jgs 9 53 AV) 
an obsolete form signifying "altogether"; "broke 
his skull in pieces." 

(6) Often used indefinitely of a large number or a 
great part, "All the cattle of Egypt died" (Ex 9 
6; cf vs 19.25); "all Judaea, and all the region 
round about" (Mt 3 5); "that all the world should 
be enrolled" (Lk 2 1); "all Asia and the world" 
(Acts 19 27); "All [people] verily held John to be a 
prophet" (Mk 11 32). M. O. Evans 

ALLAMMELECH, a-lam'5-lek (Tfir:?*!, 'al- 
lammelekh, "oak of a king"): A town in the tribe 
of Asher, the location of which is not known 
(Josh 19 26; AV Alammelech). 

ALLAR, al'ar (AV Aalar; 'AoXdp, Aaldr): Oc- 
curring once (1 Esd 5 36) and used apparently to 
indicate a place from which certain Jews came on 
the return from captivity, who could not prove their 
lineage, and were excluded for this reason from the 
privileges of the priesthood. HDB identifies with 
Immer of Ezr 2 59 and Neh 7 61 (q.v.), but this 
is not at all certain. 

ALLAY, a-la' (f'^H, henV^h, "to cause to rest," 
"soothe": "Gentleness allayeth [lit., "pacifieth"] 
great offences" [Eccl 10 4]): The word is applied 
to what "excites, disturbs and makes uneasy" 
(Smith, Synonyms Discriminated, 106). 

ALLEGE, a-lej' (iropoTtOtnit, "paratithemi," "to 
set forth," Acts 17 3): It is not used in the Eng. 
Bible in its more modern and usual sense, "to assert," 
but is about equivalent to "to prove." 

ALLEGIANCE, a-le'jans (D'l'aip)?, mishmereth, 
"a charge," from shamar, "to keep," 1 Ch 12 29): 
RVm gives as lit. meaning, "kept the charge of the 
house of Saul," which revisers consider fig. for 
"maintaining their loyalty and fidelity," i.e. 

ALLEGORY, al'e-go-ri: The term allegory, being 
derived from oWo d7opeveiv, dllo agoreuein, sig- 
nifying to say something differentirom what the 




words themselves imply, can etymologically be 
applied to any fig. form of expression of thought. 
In actual usage in theology, the term is employed 
in a restricted sense, being used however in three 
ways, viz. rhetorically, hermeneutically and homi- 
letically. In the first-mentioned sense it is the 
ordinary allegory of rhetoric, which is usually defined 
as an extended or continued metaphor, this exten- 
sion expanding from two or more statements to a 
whole volume, like Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress. 
Allegories of this character abound in the Scrip- 
tures, both in OT and in NT. Instructive exam- 
ples of this kind are found in Ps 80 8-19; Eocl 12 
3-7; Jn 10 1-16; Eph 6 11-17. According to 
traditional interpretation of both the Jewish exe- 
gesis and of the Catholic and Protestant churches 
the entire book of Cant is such an allegory. The 
subject is discussed in full in Terry's Biblical 
Hermeneuiics, etc, ch vii, 214-38. 

In the history of Bibhcal exegesis allegory rep- 
resents a distinct type of interpretation, dating 
back to pre-Christian times, practised particularly 
by the Alex Jews, and adopted by the early Church 
Fathers and still practised and defended by the 
Roman Catholic church. This method insists that 
the hteral sense, particularly of historical passages, 
does not exhaust the divinely purposed meaning 
of such passages, but that these latter also include 
a deeper and higher spiritual and mystical sense. 
The fourfold sense ascribed to the Scriptures finds 
its expression in the well-known saying: Littera 
gesta docet; quid credos, allegorica; moralis, quid 
agas; quid speres, anagogica ("The letter shows things 
done; what you are to believe, the allegoric; what 
you are to do, the moral ; what you are to hope, 
the anagogic"), according to which the allegorical 
is the hidden dogmatical meaning to be found in 
every passage. Cremer, in his Biblico-Theological 
New Testament Lexicon, shows that this method 
of finding a hidden thought behind the simple 
statement of a passage, although practised so ex- 
tensively on the Jewish side by Aristobulus and 
especially Philo, is not of Jewish origin, but was, 
particularly by the latter, taken from the Alex 
Greeks (who before this had interpreted Gr my- 
thology as the expression of higher religious con- 
ceptions) and applied to a deeper explanation of OT 
historical data, together with its theophanies, 
anthropomorphisms, anthropopathies, and the Mke, 
which in their plain meaning were regarded as 
unworthy of a place in the Divine revelation of the 
Scriptures. Such allegorizing became the common 
custom of the early Christian church, although not 
practised to the same extent in all sections, the 
Syrian church exhibiting the greatest degree of 
sobriety in this respect. In this only Jewish prec- 
edent was followed; the paraphrases commonly 
known as the Tg, the Midr, and later in its ex- 
tremest form in the Kabbalah, all showed this mark 
of eisegesis instead of exegesis. This whole false 
hermeneutioal principle and its application orig- 
inated doubtless in an unhistorioal conception of 
what the Scriptiu-es are and how they originated. 
It is characteristic of the NT, and one of the evi- 
dences of its inspiration, that in the entire Biblical 
literature of that age, both Jewish and Christian, 
it is the only book that does not practise allego- 
rizing but abides by the principle of the lit. interpre- 
tation. Nor is Paul's exegesis, in Gal 4 21-31 
an application of false allegorical methods. Here 
in ver 24 the term allegoroumena need not be 
taken in the technical sense as expressive of a 
method of interpretation, but merely as a para- 
phrase of the preceding thought; or, if taken tech- 
nically, the whole can be regarded as an argumentum 
ad hominem, a way of demonstration found also else- 
where in Paul's writings. The Protestant church. 

beginning with Luther, has at all times rejected 
this allegorizing and adhered to the safe and sane 
principle, practised by Christ and the entire NT, 
viz. Sensum ne inferas, sed efferas ("Do not carry a 
meaniQg into [the Scriptures] but draw it out of [the 
Scriptures]"). It is true that the older Protestant 
theology still adheres to a sensus mysticus in the 
Scriptures, but by this it means those passages in 
which the sense is conveyed not per verba (through 
words), but per res verbis descriptas ("through things 
described by means of words"), as e.g. in the parable 
and the type. 

In homiletics allegorizing is applied to the method 
which draws spiritual, truths from common his- 
torical statements, as e.g. when the heahng of a 
leper by Christ is made the basis of an exposition 
of the healing of the soul by the Saviour. Naturally 
this is not interpretation in the exegetical sense. 


ALLELUIA, al-5-loo'ya. See Hallelujah. 

ALLEMETH, al'5-meth (inp??, Wlemeth, "con- 
cealment"; AV Alemeth, 1 Ch 6 60): Name of 
a town in tribe of Benjamin, near Anathoth, one 
of the cities given to the sons of Aaron, the same as 
Almon of Josh 21 18. The AV Alemeth (q.v.) 
is based upon the Heb reading np^?, 'alemeth. 
Its site is the modern Almtt, a village a short dis- 
tance N.E. of Anathoth. 

ALLIANCE, a-ll'ans: Frequent references are 
made to alliances between the patriarchs and for- 
eigners. Abraham is reported to have 

1. In the had "confederates" among the chiefs 
Patriarchal of the Canaanites (Gen 14 13). He 
Stories also allied with Abimelech, king of 

Gerar (21 22-34). Isaac's alliance with 
Abimelech (26 26-34), which is offered as an ex- 
planation of the name Beer-sheba (ver 33), appears 
to be a variant of the record of alliance between 
Abraham and Abimelech. Jacob formed an al- 
liance with Laban, the Syrian (31 44-54), by which 
Gilead was established as a boundary line between 
Israel and Aram. These treaties refer, in all 
probability, to the early period of Israel's history, 
and throw a good deal of light upon the relation 
between Israel and the Philis and the Syrians imme- 
diately after the conquest of Canaan. 

The only reference to an alliance between Israel 
and foreign people prior to the conquest of Canaan, 

that might be regarded as historical, 

2. In Pre- is that made between Israel and the 
Canaanitic Kenite tribes at the foot of Sinai, the 
History precise nature of which, however, is 

not very clearly indicated. Such al- 
liances led to intermarriages between the members 
of the allied tribes. Thus Moses married a Kenite 
woman (Jgs 1 16; 4 11). The patriarchal mar- 
riages refer to the existing conditions after the con- 
quest. Possibly one more alliance belonging to 
that period is that between Israel and Moab (Nu 
26 1-3). According to the narrative, Israel be- 
came attached to the daughters of Moab, at Shittim, 
and was led astray after Baal-peor. Its historicity 
is proven from the prophetic allusions to this event 
(cf Hos 9 10; Mic 6 5). 

The invading hordes of Israel met with strong 
opposition on the part of the natives of Pal (Jgs 1 

21.27-36). In time, alliances were 

3. During formed with some of them, which 
the Con- generally led, as might be expected, 
quest to considerable trouble. One concrete 

illustration is preserved in the story of 
the Gibeonites (Josh 9). Intermarriages were fre- 
quent. The tribe of Judah thus became consolidated 
through the alliance and the amalgamation with 
the Kenites and Calebites (Jgs 1 10-16). These 




relations between Israel and the Canaanites threat- 
ened the preservation of Yahwism. 

Prohibitory measures were adopted in the legal 
codes with a view to Jewish separateness and purity 
(Ex 23 32; 34 12.15; Dt 7 2; cf Jgs 
4. The 2 2.3; Lev 18 3.4; 20 22 f). 

Monarchy But at a very early date in the his- 
tory of the Jewish kingdom the official 
heads of the people formed such alUances and inter- 
married. David became an ally to Achish of Gath 
(1 S 27 2-12) and later on with Abner, which led to 
the consolidation of Judah and Israel into one king- 
dom (2 S 3 17-21; 5 1-3). It appears likewise 
that Toi, king of Hamath, formed an aUiance with 
David (2 S 9 10) and that Hiram of Tyre was his 
ally (1 K 5 12a). Alliances with foreign nations 
became essential to the progress of trade and com- 
merce during the reign of Solomon. Two of his 
treaties are recorded: one with Hiram of Tyre (IK 
5 12-18; 9 11-14) and one with Pharaoh, king of 
Egypt (1 K 9 16). 

After the disruption, Shishak of Egypt invaded 
Judaea, and probably also Israel. This meant an 
abrogation of the treaty existing be- 
6. The tween Israel and Egypt during the 

Divided reign of Solomon. In consequence of 
Kingdom the war between the two kingdoms, 
Asa formed an aUiance with Ben- 
hadad of Syria (1 K 15 18-20). Later on Ahab 
sought an aUiance with Ben-hadad (1 K 20 31- 
34). Friendly relations ensued between Israel and 
Judah, during the reign of Jehoshaphat, which 
continued to the close of the dynasty of Omri 
(1 K 22 2-4.50; 2 K 3 7). With the accession 
of Jehu, hostilities were resumed. In the Syro- 
Ephraimitic war, Israel was allied with Syria, and 
Judah with Assyria (2 K 16 6-9; Isa 7). This 
opened the way to the Assyr power into both king- 
doms. Relief against Assyria was sought in Egypt; 
Hoshea rebelled against Shalmaneser, and allied 
with So (Sevechus, the Shabaka of the 25th Dynasty) 
and thus brought about the fall of Samaria, 

Hezekiah likewise sought an alliance with So, 
but derived no assistance from him. He is re- 
corded to have formed friendly rela- 

6. The tions with Berodach-baladan of Baby- 
Kingdom Ion (2 K 20 12-18). These aUiances 
of Judah resulted in the introduction of foreign 

cults into Jerus (2 K 16 10.11). Dur- 
ing the reign of Manasseh, Yahwism was seriously 
threatened by foreign religious practices (2 K 21 
2-9). The protesting spirit against the prevailing 
conditions found expression in the Dt code, which 
emphasizes the national policy. Josiah fought 
against Pharaoh-necoh as an ally of Assyria (2 K 
23 29). Jehoahaz continued the Assyr alliance and 
was dethroned in consequence by Pharaoh-necoh (ver 
33). Jehoiakin was disposed to be friendly with 
Egypt, and even after his subjection to Nebuchad- 
nezzar, he remained loyal to the Pharaoh (ver 35). 
Zedekiah came to the throne as an ally of Babylon. 
When he broke this aUiance, the destruction of Jerus 
resulted (25). 

Judas Maccabaeus sought an aUiance with the 
Romans (1 Mace 8; Jos, Ant, XII, x, 6) which was 

renewed by Jonathan (1 Mace 12 1; 

7. In Ant, XIII, v, 8) and by Simon (1 
Post-exilic Mace 15 17; Ant, XIII, vh, 3). 
Times Treaties were concluded with the 

Spartans (1 Maco 12 2; 14 20; Ant, 

XII, iv, 10; XIII, V, 8). The Rom aUiance was 
again renewed by Hyrcanus about 128 BC (Ant, 

XIII, ix, 2), This alliance proved to be of fatal 
consequence to the independence of the Jews 
(Ant, XIV, iv, 4; and xiv, 5). For the rites con- 
nected with the formation of the eariier alliances, 
see Covenant. Samuel Cohon 

ALLIED, a-lid' (31]? , karobh, "near," as in Gen 
45 10; Ex 13 17, etc): Neh 13 4 refers either to 
family ties, as in Ruth 2 20, or to intimate asso- 

ALLOM, al'om ('A\X<4v, Alldn): RV Allon 
(q.v.): One of the families of the "servants of 
Solomon," whose descendants returned with Zerub- 
babel from Babylon in the First Return, 537 BC 
(1 Esd 5 34). The name is not found in the parallel 
lists of Ezra and Nehemiah, although some have 
tried to identify with the last name of each list, 
Ami of Ezr 2 57, and Amon of Neh 7 59. This is 
not probable. 

ALLON, al'on (I'lbS, 'allon, "oak"): 

(1) A town in the tribe of Naphtali in northern 
Palestine (Josh 19 33), according to AV, which 
follows some Heb texts. It is better however to 
read with the RV, "oak" Cil'i?, 'elon), rather than 
as proper noun. 

(2) A prominent descendant of the tribe of 
Simeon (1 Ch 4 37). 

(3) RVforAllomoftheAVinl Esd 5 34 (q.v.). 

ALLON-BACUTH, al'on-ba'kuth (^33 libS, 
'allon bdkhuth; AV transliterates Allon-bachuth, 
al-on-bak'uth, "oak of weeping") : The burial place 
of Deborah, the nurse of Rebekah (Gen 35 8); 
it appears from the narrative that she made her 
home with Jacob, who had returned from Paddan- 
aram, and was sojourning at the time at Bethel, 
in the vicinity of which was the "oak of weeping," 
under which she was buried. 

ALLOW, a-lou', ALLOWANCE, a-lou'ans: The 
vb. "to allow" is used in AV to tr four different 
Gr words: (1) sunevdoh&o, "to approve together" 
(with others) (RV "consent unto"), Lk 11 48. 
(2) prosdechomai, "to receive to oneself," "admit" 
(RV "look for," m "accept") • Acts 24 15. (3) gin- 
hsko, "to know," "recognize : "That which I do, I 
allow not" (RV "I know not"), i.e. "I do not under- 
stand what I am doing, my conduct is inexphcable 
tome" (Grimm-Thayer) ; Rom 7 15. (4) dokimdzo, 
"to prove," "approve." "Happy is he that con- 
demneth not himseK in the thing which he alloweth" 
(RV "approveth," i.e. in practice), i.e. who is not 
troubled with scruples; Rom 14 22. Thus RV has 
removed the vb. "allow" in each case in which it 
occurs in AV, it being somewhat ambiguous in 
meaning (its original sense, as derived from Lat 
allocare, "to place," "assign," "grant," being influ- 
enced by another word, Lat allavdare, "to praise"). 
The noun "allowance" occurs in the sense of quan- 
tity of food allowed, in 2 K 25 30 (AV, RV) and 
the II passage Jer 52 34 (RV; "diet" in AV). 

D. MiALL Edwards 

ALLOY, a-loi' (bilS, h'dhil): In Isa 1 25 RVm; 
tr'i "tin" in the text. Elsewhere in both VSS 
b'dhll is tr'' Tin (q.v.). 

ALLURE, a-lur' (nns , pathah, "to persuade," 
"woo," "entice"; SeXeiJu, deledzo, "to entrap," "lay 
a bait"): 

(1) "I wiU allure her, and bring her into the 
wilderness" (Hos 2 14), with evident reference to 
the AssjT invasion and the devastation of the land, 
followed up by the Exile. Thus would Jeh entice 
Israel to repent by gentle punishment; then would 
follow her restoration and the outpouring of His 
love (vs 14 ff). 

(2) "They aUure through the lusts of the flesh" 
(2 Pet 2 18, RV "entice"). Wicked men allure 
to destruction; God (as above) aUures to punish- 
ment, repentance and restoration. M. 0. Evans 




ALMIGHTY, 61-mit'i; (1) CI©, shaddai [Gen 
17 1]): Found in the OT forty-eight times, most 
of these in the Book of Job; it occurs either alone 
or in combination with bs, 'el, "God")- The root 
meaning is uncertain. (2) {TravTOKp&Toip, pantokrd- 
tor) , the exclusive tr of this Gr word in the NT, found 
principally in Rev (nine times) ; once besides (2 Cor 
6 18). Its occurrence in the Apoc is frequent. See 
God, Names or. 

ALMODAD, al-mo'dad (^niiabsit , 'almodhadh, 
"the beloved," or, "God is beloved"): The first 
mentioned of the thirteen sons of Joktan (Gen 10 
25-29; 1 Ch 1 19-23). A south Arabian name, 
and pointing to a south Arabian tribe. See Abimael. 

ALMON, al'mon (I'DSb?, 'almon, "hidden"): 
A Levitical city in the tribe of Benjamin (Josh 21 
18), the same as "Allemeth" RV, "Alemeth" AV, 
of 1 Ch 6 60 (q.v.). 

ALMON-DIBLATHAIM, al'mon-dib-la-tha'im 
(DiriblT yob?, '■almon dibhlathayim, "Almon of 
the double cake of figs"): A station in the wilder- 
ness journey ings of the Israelites, located in Moab 
between Diban-^ad and the mountains of Abarim 
(Nu 33 46.47). It was near the end of the forty 
years' wanderings. The name was probably given 
because the location was like two lumps of pressed 
figs. In both occurrences the word has the accusa- 
tive ending of direction, and should properly be read : 
"Almon toward Diblathaim." It was probably the 
same place as Beth-diblathaim of Jer 48 22, men- 
tioned in the prophet's oracle against Moab. 

ALMOND, a'mund: 

(1) npip, shakedh. Gen 43 11; Nu 17 8, etc. 
The word shaked comes from a Heb root meaning 
to "watch" or "wait." In Jer 1 11.12 there is a 
play on the word, "And I said, I see a rod of an 

> ■ . 

^y ' 


'^^mA ■ 

\%ij7 ii^r^ 

^^pf^j ; 




«f.:',| - 


Almond — Amygdalus communis. 

almond-tree [shakedh]. Then said Jehovah unto me, 
Thou hast well seen : for I will watch [shokedh] over 
my word to perform it." 

(2) T^b luz; AV hazel. Gen 30 37; lauz is the 
mod Arab, name for "almond" — Luz was the old 
name of Bethel (q.v.). 

The almond tree is mentioned in Eccl 12 5, 

where in the description of old age it says "the 

almond -tree shall blossom." The 

1. Almond reference is probably to the white hair 
Tree of age. An almond tree in full bloom 

upon a distant hillside has a certain 
likeness to a head of white hair. 

A rod of almond is referred to Gen 30 37, where 
"Jacob took him rods of fresh poplar, and of the 

almond [luz] and of the plane-tree; and 

2. A Rod peeled white streaks in them" as a 
of Almond means of securing ' 'ring-streaked, speck- 
led, and spotted" lambs and goats— a 

proceeding founded doubtless upon some ancient 
folklore. Aaron's rod that budded (Nu 17 2.3) 
was an almond rod. Also see Jer 1 11 referred to 

The blossoms of the almond are mentioned Ex 26 
33 f; 37 19 f, etc. "Cups made like almond- 
blossoms in one branch, a knop (i.e. 

3. The knob) and a flower," is the description 
Blossoms given of parts of the sacred candle- 
sticks. It is doubtful exactly what was 

intended — the most probable is, as Dillmann has 
suggested, that the cup was modeled after the calyx 
of the almond flower. See Candlestick. 

Israel directed his sons (Gen 43 11) to carry 

almonds as part of their present to Joseph in Egypt. 

Palestine is a land where the almond 

4. The flourishes, whereas in Egypt it would 
Fruit appear to have been unconmion. 

Almonds are today esteemed a deli- 
cacy; they are eaten salted or beaten into a pulp 
with sugar like the famihar German Marzipan. 

The almond is Amygdalus communis (N.O. 
Rosaceae), a tree very similar -to the peach. The 
common variety grows to the height of 25 feet 
and produces an abundant blossom which appears 
before the leaves; in Pal this is fully out at the 
end of January or beginning of February; it is the 
harbinger of spring. This early blossoming is 
supposed to be the origin of the name shakedh which 
contains the idea of "early." The masses of almond 
trees in full bloom in some parts of Pal make a 
very beautiful and striking sight. The bloom of 
some varieties is almost pure white, from a Uttle 
distance, in other parts the delicate pink, always 
present at the inner part of the petals, is diffused 
enough to give a pink blush to the whole blossom. 
The fruit is a drupe with a dry fibrous or woody 
husk which splits into two halves as the fruit 
ripens. The common wild variety grows a kernel 
which is bitter from the presence of a substance 
called amygdalon, which yields in its turn prussic 
(hydrocyanic) acid. Young trees are grafted with 
cuttings from the sweet variety or are budded with 
apricot, peach or plum. E. W. G. Mastbrman 

ALMOST, ol'most (ev bXlyi^): In Acts 26 28 the 
Gr en oligo does not mean "almost," although 
scholars have for centuries tr"* the clause "Almost 
thou persuadest me to become a Christian." The 
revisers saw clearly the errors of their predeces- 
sors, so far as the signification of the first two words 
is concerned; but their explanation of the sentence 
is also erroneous; for the Gr cannot mean "With 
but Uttle persuasion thou wouldst fain make me a 
Christian." Paul's reply proves that en oligo must 
be taken with the last word poitsai, not with pei- 
theis, since he takes up Agrippa's en oligo, couples 
it with en megdlo and continues with genisthai 
which is the regular passive of poiesai (of Lysias 
xii.71 with 72). And the idea of "Christian" is 
also taken up and repeated in hopolos kai ego 

An investigation of the usage of en oligo shows 
that it was never used in the sense of "almost." 




The phrase occurs first in the Hymn to Hermes, 
240, and here it is evidently an abbreviated expres- 
sion for the Homeric 6\ly(p ivl x^PV, ollgo eni 
chord (M 423). Cf K 161, P 394. But it was 
used for both time and place, with the substantive 
expressed or understood (Thuc. i.93.1; iii.66.3; iv. 
26.3; iv.55.3; ii.84.3; ii.86.5; iv.96.3; v.ll2; vii. 
67.3; vii.87.1; Pind. Pyth. viii.131; Eur. Suppl. 
1126; Hel. 771; Isoc.iv.83; Dem. lviii.60; iii.l8). 
These uses persist from Homer far down into the 
post-classical literature (Plut. Per. 159 F; Coriol. 
217 F; Mar. 427 A; Crass. 547 C; Polyb. x.l8; 
Appian, Mithrad. 330; Themistius xi.l43C; Eus- 
tath. II.B, p.339.18). In the NT the phrase occurs 
also in Eph 3 3. Here too the common versions 
are incorrect. The clause in which the phrase 
occurs rneans simply, "as I said a little while ago" — 
the addition of en oligo merely indicates that the 
interval indicated by pro is short, an idea which 
would have been expressed in classical Gr by the 
simple dative, oligo and the adverb prdteron (Ar. 
Thesm. 578; Aeschin. i. 2, 26, 72, 165; ii. 77, 147). 
Only a short while before Paul had expressed 
practically the same thought (Eph 3 3) and in 
almost identical language. 

_ Consequently, en oligo, in the NT, means "a 
little," and is equivalent to oligos which occurs 
in 2 Pet 2 18. In classical writers the idea would 
have been expressed by ollgon, or kat' oligon. 
So en oligo, which originally signified "in a little 
space" (or time), comes to mean simply "a Uttle" 
(bit), ein bischen, but is never equivalent to oligou 
("within a little") in any period of the language. 
The Bang James translators disregarded the real 
significance of poiesai, or adopted the reading of 
the inferior MSS (genesthai), so as to make the 
rest of the sentence harmonize with their tr of 
the first two words; and the revisers force the 
last two words into an impossible service, since 
the object of poiesai of which christiandn is the 
factitive predicate, must be a third person, but 
certainly not Agrippa. Some scholars are of the 
opinion that the thought is: "You are trying to 
persuade me so as to make me a Christian." This 
is, indeed, the Spanish version; but examples show 
that the infinitive after -n-eWeiv was used in a 
different sense. The best MS reads TTIGEIC. 
This might, of course, stand for treiBeis. But 
/i.eiri8eis may point to an original joeirnrotos. Cf 
Jas 4 5 and 2 Cor 5 2, Plato Leg. 855 E. If 
these contentions be correct, the verb means simply 
"earnestly desire," and not "persuade." Cf 
Herod, v.93; Plato Protag. 329 D; Aesch. Pers. 542; 
Soph. Phil. 534; Eur. H.F. 1408; I.T. 542; Cycl. 
68; Ion 1432; Ar. Lys. 605, tofi det; ti potheis; 
Agrippa is asking, "What do you want, Paul? 
What are you trying to do? Make me a Christian?' ' 
The imphcation in Paul's reply is that he is very 
desirous indeed of making him a Christian. And 
this interpretation harmonizes with the scene. 
The apostle's business at this juncture is not to 
convert heathen to Christianity; for he is in chains 
before Agrippa, Berenice, Festus and prominent 
men of Caesarea, metd polUs phantasias (ver 23), 
to answer the charges brought against him by 
the Jews. But he holds forth at length and with 
such ardor that the Roman king says (though not 
necessarily in irony) : "You seem to be anxious to 
make me a Christian in small measure." And 
Paul responds: "both small and great." All the 
MSS, except Sinaiticus, have ireiffeis (Alexandr. 
TTEIGH-)- Several read genesthai (instead of poi- 
esai). Wetstenius (Amsterdam 1752) and Knapp 
(Halle 1829) follow these MSS. So most of the 
old tr»: Coverdale (1535), "Thou persuadest me 
in a parte to become a Christen"; Biblia Sacra 

(Paris 1745) "In modico suades me C. fieri"; a 
Latin MS, 14th cent., now in Lane Sem., Cin- 
cinnati; Rosenmueller's Scholia (1829), "Parum 
abest quin mihi persuadeas ut fiam"; Stier und 
Theile's Polyglotten Bibel (1849); Tregelles (1857- 
79, with Jerome's version); Edouard Reuss, His- 
toire aposiolique (Paris 1876), "Tu vas me persuader 
bient6t de devenir Chretien." The tr of Queen 
Elizabeth's Bible is "Somewhat thou bryngeste 
me in minde for to become Chryste." Wy cliff e 
renders "In litil thing thou oouncelist me for to be 
maad a Christen man." Erasmus takes en oligo 
in the sense of "a fittle." Calvin's rendering, 
"Thou wilt make me a Christian in a moment," 
has been adopted in various countries (Wetstenius, 
Kuinoel, Neander, de Wette, Lange, Robinson, 
Hackett, Conybeare). The older scholars generally 
hold to "almost" (Valla, Luther, Beza, Grotius, 
Castaho, Du Veil, Bengel, Stier). Some interpret 
the phrase "with little labor" (Oecumenius, 01s- 
hausen, Baumgarten, Meyer, Lechler). Neander 
maintains that if we adopt the readings en megalo 
in Paul's answer, Agrippa's words must be explained 
"with a few reasons ("which will not cost you 
much trouble"). Meyer-Wendt {Kritisch-exegetisches 
Handbuch iiber die Apostelgeschichte) translates "mit 
Wenigem ueberredest du mich Christ zu werden." 
Meyer himself conceives the words to have been 
spoken sarcastically. See Classical Review, XXII, 
238-41. J. E. Haeby 

ALMS, ams, ALMSGIVING, ams-giv'ing; The 
Eng. word "alms" is an abridged form of the Gr 
word, iXeri/wcriivri, eleemostine (cf "eleemosynary"), 
appearing in gradually reduced forms in German 
Almosen, Wyolif's Almesse, Scotch Aw'mons, and 
our alms. 

The later Jews often used "righteousness" 
g^dhaljMh as meaning alms, that being in their 
view the foremost righteousness. (Cf our modern 
use of "charity" to denote almsgiving.) This use 
is seen in the Talm and in the frequent translations 
of the Hebrew word for "righteousness" (g^dhakah) 
by "alms" (eleemosune) in the LXX, though 
nothing warranting this is found in the Heb OT, 
or in the true text of the NT. This notion of right- 
eousness as alms being well-nigh universal among 
Jews in Jesus' day, and spreading even among 
Christians, accounts for "alms" in Mt 6 1, where 
the true text has "righteousness": "Take heed that 
ye do not your righteousness before men, to be 
seen of them" (RV with BI^D, the Lat versions, 
etc). The oriental versions which generally read 
"alms" may be accounted for on the supposition that 
"alms" was first written on the margin as explaining 
the supposed meaning of "righteousness," and then, 
as according with this accepted oriental idea, was 
substituted for it in the text by the copyists. 

DikaiostXne and eleemosune are both used in 
the LXX to tr hesedh, "kindness," and are also 
both used to tr fdhakak, "justice.'' Almsgiving 
was regarded not merely as a plain evidence of 
righteousness in general but also as an act of justice, 
a just debt owing to the needy. "No one refuses 
directly," Maokie says, hence, possibly, Christ's 
teaching in Lk 11 41, "Let your righteousness 
[charity] be from within," "Give your hearts to 

In the course of time the impulse and command to 
give alms in a true human way, out of pity, such 
as is found expressed in Dt 15 11 AV, "Thou shaft 
open thine hand wide unto thy brother, to thy 
poor, and to thy needy, in thy land," gave place to 
a formal, "meritorious" practice, possessing, like 
sacrifice, as men came to think, the power of atoning 
for man's sins, and redeeming him from calamity 
and death. For instance, Prov 11 4 (cf 16 6; 




21 3) was expounded: "Water will quench blazing 
fire; so doth almsgiving make atonement for sins" 
(Ecclus 3 30). "Lay up ahns in thy storehouse; 
it shaU deUver thee from affliction" (Ecclus 29 12). 
The story of Tob is especially in point : it is simply 
a lesson on almsgiving and its redeeming powers: 
"Alms deUvers from death and will purge away all 
sin" (Tob 1 3.16; 2 14; 4 7-11; 12 8.9. Cf Sir 
29 11 ff). Kindred teaching abounds in the Talm: 
"Alms-giving is more excellent than all offerings," is 
"equal to the whole law," will "deliver from the 
condemnation of hell," will "make one perfectly 
righteous," etc. According to Rabbi Assi, "Alms- 
giving is a powerful paraclete between the Israelites 
and their Father in heaven; it brings the time of re- 
demption nigh" {Bdbha' Bathra' Talm lOo). 

The Roman Catholics, holding the books of Tob 
and Sir to be canonical, find in them proof-texts 
for their doctrine of almsgiving, and likewise attach 
great value to the gifts to the poor as atoning for 
sins. Protestants, by a natural reaction, have failed 
to hold always at its true value what was and is an 
important Christian duty (see Lk 12 33 AV, and 
cf Mt 6 19-24: "Sell that ye have and give alms," 
etc). It seems to have been so regarded and kept 
up in the Christian communities until the beginning 
of the 4th cent. (Apos Const II 36; Cyprian, De 
Opera and Eleemos. xiv). 

The teaching of Jesus on the subject is important, 
first, as bearing upon Jewish ideas and practices, 
and second, as bearing upon present-day Christian 
ideas and practices. 

This teaching appears most conspicuously in the 
Sermon on the Mount. While showing what is 
required of the subjects of the Messianic reign. He 
avowedly sets forth a higher and more spiritual 
morality than that which was taught and practised 
by the scribes and Pharisees: "Except your right- 
eousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes 
and Pharisees, ye shall in no wise enter into the 
kingdom of heaven" (Mt 5 20). There, too, He 
lays down the general principle embodied in the 
words of Mt 6 1: "Take heed that ye do not your 
righteousness before men, to be seen of them," 
and illustrates it by applying it to the three exercises 
most valued among the Jews (commended together 
in Tob 12 8), viz. almsgiving (Mt 6 2.4), prayer 
(vs 5-15), and fasting (vs 16-18). Jewish writers 
claim that these are "the three cardinal disciplines 
which the synagogue transmitted to the Christian 
church and the Mohammedan mosque" (cf Koran, 
Sura 2 40, 104; 9 54). 

Clearly what Jesus here forbids in general is not 
publicity in performing good deeds, which is often 
necessary and proper, but ostentatious publicity, 
for the purpose of attracting attention. (The Gr 
conveys distinctly this idea of purpose, and the 
verb for "to be seen" is the one from which comes 
our word "theater.") 

Jewish writers, as also Or and Rom philosophers, 
have many notable maxims upon the beauty and 
importance of being unostentatious in virtue, 
especially in deeds of benevolence. The Essenes 
had their treasury in a chamber of their own in the 
temple that both the giving and the taking should 
be vmobserved (Mish, Sh% v. 6). Rabbi Eleazer 
said, "Alms-giving should be done in secret and not 
before men, for he who gives before men is a siimer, 
and God shall bring also the good deed before his 
judgment" (B.B. 9a; cf Eccl 12 14). 

In applying this principle to almsgiving Jesus 
teaches His disciple: "When . . . thou doest alms, 
sound not a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites 
do" (Mt 6 2). The conjecture of Calvin, followed 
by Stier and others, and mentioned as early as Euthy- 
mius, that it was a practice among Jews for an 
ostentatious almsgiver literally to sound a trumpet. 

or cause a trumpet to be sounded before him, in 
public places to summon the needy, is without 
foundation (Lightfoot) ; as is also the notion, made 
current by the rabbis and accepted by Edersheim 
{The Temple, etc, 26), that by "sounding a trumpet" 
Jesus was alluding to the trumpet-like receptacles 
of brass in the temple treasury. There is no proof 
that these were found "in the synagogues," or "in 
the streets." "Sound a trumpet," according to 
the Gr commentators, and the best modern authori- 
ties, is merely a fig. expression common to many 
languages, for self-parade — efforts to attract notice 
and win applause (cf our vulgar Eng. saying about 
"blowing your own horn"). The contrast with 
the common practice instituted by Jesus is the 
significant thing: "But when thou doest alms" 
— "thou" is emphatic by position in the Gr — "let 
not thy left hand know what thy right hand 
doeth," etc, i.e. "So far from trumpeting your alms- 
giving before the public, do not even let it be 
known to yourself." Jesus here, Calvin well says, 
"silently glances at a kind of folly which prevails 
everywhere among men, that they think they have 
lost their pains if there have not been many spec- 
tators of their virtues." (The traditional saying 
of Mohammed, "In almsgiving, the left hand 
should not know what the right has given," is 
evidently borrowed from this saying of Jesus.) It 
is worthy of note that, despite popular practice, to 
give alms with right motives, and only to those who 
were worthy to receive, was a matter of special 
solicitude and instruction with the best among 
Jews as well as among Christians. The words 
of the Psalmist, "Blessed is he that considereth 
the poor," are construed to be an admonition to 
"take personal interest in him and not simply give 
him ahns" (Lev. R. xxxiv). "When thou wilt 
do good, know to whom thou doest it. Give unto 
the good and help not the sinner" (Ecclus 12 1-6; 
ci Did 1 5.6). "He that gives a free offering should 
give with a well-meaning eye" ( Yer. B.D. 4 11). 
Jesus' words concerning the "single" and the "evil" 
eye (cf Lk 11 34-36), and Paul's teaching, "God 
loveth a cheerful giver" (2 Cor 9 7-9) have their 
counterparts in Jewish teaching. Rabbi Eleazer, 
referring to Hos 10 12, taught this high doctrine: 
"The kindness displayed in the giving of ahns 
decides the final reward" (Suk. 496). Other kin- 
dred teaching in a way anticipated Jesus' supreme 
lesson, "that thine alms may be in secret: and thy 
Father who seeth in secret shall recompense thee 
(Mt 6 4). 

LiTEHATtTRB. — Commentaries ad loc. Rabbinical Ut- 
eratm'e in point. D. Cassel, Die ArTnenverwaltung dea 
alien Israel. 1887. Qeq. B. EagEB 

ALMUG, al'mug. See Algum. 

ALNATHAN, al'na-than ('AXvaedv, Alnathdn, 
"God has given," RV ELNATHAN): Apocryphal 
name of a person (1 Esd 8 44) corresponding to 
Elnathan of Ezr 8 16. He was one of the learned 
men summoned by Ezra, as he was beginning his 
journey to Jerus, and sent to Iddo to ask for minis- 
ters for the house of Jeh. 

ALOES, al'oz, LIGNALOES, lin-al'oz, lig-nal'oz 
(DibnS , 'dhalim, Nu 24 6, tr "lign-aloes" [=lignum 
aloes, "wood of aloes"], Prov 7 17; tlibnS, 'dhaloth, 
Ps 45 8; Cant 4 14; 6X6t\, aide, Jn 19 39): Men- 
tioned as a substance for perfuming garments (Ps 
45 8) and beds (Prov 7 17). In Cant 4 14, it 
occurs in a list of the most precious spices. The 
most memorable use of aloes as a spice is in Jn 19 
39: "There came also Nicodemus, he who at the 
first came to him at night, bringing a mixture of 
myrrh and aloes, about a hundred pounds." This 




was an imirtense quantity and if the aloes bore any 
large proportion to the myrrh the mixture must 
have been purchased at a very high cost. The most 
difficult mention of aloes is the earliest where (Nu 
24 6.6) Balaam in his blessing on Israel exclaims — 

" How goodly are thy tents, O Jacob, 
Thy tabernacles, O Israeli 
As valleys are they spread forth, 
As gardens by the river-side. 
As Ugn-aloes which Jehovah hath planted, 
As cedar-trees beside the waters." 

As the aloes in question grow in E. Asia it is difficult 
to Balaam could have come to speak of them 
as living trees. Post {HDB, I, 69) suggests that 
they may possibly have been growing at that time 
in the Jordan valley; this is both improbable 
and unnecessary. Balaam need have had no actual 
tree in his mind's eye but may have mentioned the 

Aloes — Aquilaria agallocha. 

aloe as a tree famous over the Orient for its precious- 
ness. That the reference is poetical rather than 
literal may be supposed by the expression in the 
next ver "cedar-trees beside the waters" — a situation 
very imnatural for the high-mountain-loving cedar. 
Yet another explanation is that the Heb has been 
altered and that D'^b^S, 'ellm, "terebinths" instead 
of D^brtS, 'dhallm, "aloes" stood in the original 

The aloe wood of the Bible is eaglewood — so 
misnamed by the Portuguese who confused the 
Malay name for it (agila) with the Lat aquila, 
"eagle" — a product of certain trees of the N.O. 
Aquilariaceae, growing in S.E. Asia. The two most 
valued varieties are Aquilaria malaccensis and A. 
agallocha — both fine spreading trees. The resin, 
which gives the fragrant quahty to the wood, is 
formed almost entirely in the heart wood; logs are 
buried, the outer part decays while the inner part, 
saturated with the resin, forms the "eagle wood" or 
"aloe wood" of commerce; "aloes" being the same 
wood in a finely powdered condition. To the Arabs 
this wood is known as 'ud. It shows a beautiful 
graining and takes a high poUsh. 

These aloes must be clearly distinguished from 
the well-known medicinal aloes, of ancient fame. 
This is a resin from Aloes socatrina, and allied species, 
of the N.O. Liliaceae, originally from the island of 
Socotra, but now from Barbadoes, the Cape of 
Good Hope and other places. The "American 

aloe" (Agave americana) which today is cultivated 
in many parts of Palestine, is also quite distinct 
from the BibUcal plant. E. W. G. Masterman 

ALOFT, a-loft' (lirdvo), epdno) : Only in 1 Esd 
8 92. Meaning obscure. The statement following 
a confession of sin means probably that Israel in 
penitence returning to the Lord, is exultant in the 
assurance of His forgiveness, and encouraged in 
efforts at reformation. 

ALONG, a-long': Corresponding to two different 
Heb words, Jgs 9 25; 1 S 6 12; Jer 41 6, joined 
with "come" and "go," vividly describes a course 
that is taken — it emphasizes its directness and im- 
mediateness. In Jgs 7 12, "lay aZon? in the valley," 
probably means "all the length" or "at length." 

ALOTH, a'loth (mby, 'aloih): So found in AV 
and RVm in 1 K 4 16', where the RV has BEA- 
LOTH (Jlibys, b''aldth). A town, or district in 
northern Pal, together with Asher under Baana, 
one of Solomon's twelve civil officers. Conder 
identifies with the ruin 'Alia, near Achzib. There 
was another Bealoth in southern Pal (Josh 15 24). 
The difference in the form of the word in AV and 
RV is due to interpretation of the initial b as prepo- 
sition "in" in the former, and as part of the word 
itself in the latter. 

ALPHA, al'fa, AND OMEGA, o'me-ga, o-me'ga, 
o-meg'a (A and n = A and O): The first and last 
letters of the Gr alphabet, hence symbolically, 
"beginning and end"; in Rev "The Eternal One" 
in 1 8 of the Father, in 21 6 and 22 13 of the Son. 
Cf Theodoret, HE, iv.8: "We used alpha down to 
omega, i.e. all." A similar expression is found in 
Lat (Martial, v.26). Cf Aretas (Cramer's Catenae 
Graecae in NT) on Rev 1 8 and TertulUan {Monog, 
5): "So also two Gr letters, the first and last, did 
the Lord put on Himself, symbols of the beginning 
and the end meeting in Him, in order that just as A 
rolls on to and fl returns again to A, so He 
might show that both the evolution of the beginning 
to the end is in Him and again the return of the 
end to the beginning." Cyprian, Testim, ii.l; vi. 
22; iii.lOO, Paulinus of Nola Cam. xix.645; xxx. 
89; Prudentius, Cathem., ix. 10-12. In Patristic 
and later literature the phrase is regularly applied 
to the Son. God blesses Israel from 'aleph to taw 
(Lev 26 3-13), but curses from waw to mem (Lev 
26 14-43). So Abraham observed the whole law 
from 'aleph to taw. Consequently, "Alpha and 
Omega" may be a Gr rendering of the Heb phrase, 
which expressed among the later Jews the whole 
extent of a thing. J. E. Harry 

ALPHABET, al'fa-bet: An alphabet is a list of 
the elementary sounds used in anjr language. More 
strictly speaking it is that particular 
1. Defini- series, commonly known as the Phoen 
tion or Can alphabet, which was in use in 

the region of Pal about 1000 BC, 
and which is the ancestor of nearly all modern 
written alphabets whether Sem or European. It is 
the alphabet therefore of OT Heb and Aram, and 
NT Gr, of the superscription of Caesar and the Lat 
inscription on the cross, as well as of Eng. through 
the Gr and Lat. It is an interesting fact, with 
many practical bearings on text and exegesis, that 
three sets of letters so very unlike in appearance 
as Heb, Gr and modern Eng. should be the same in 
origin and alike in nature. Although the earliest 
surviving inscriptions must be a good deal later 
than the separation between the Gr and Heb, the 
records in each are more like one another than 
either is hke its own modern printed form. 




The characteristics of an alphabet are (1) the 
analysis of sounds into single letters rather than 
syllables or images, (2) the fixed order of succession 
in the letters, (3) the signs for the sounds, whether 
names or written symbols. 

Of these the analysis into single letters, instead 
of whole words or syllables, is the characteristic 
element. The order of the letters may vary, as 
that of the Sanskrit does from the European, and 
yet the hst remain not only alphabetic but the 
"same" alphabet, i.e. each sound represented by a 
similar name or written character. On the face 
of it, therefore, it might be imagined that the Egyp 
and Bab, the Cypriote, the Minoan and other 
forms earlier than the Can which are known or 
suspected to have had phonetic systems, may have 
had Msts of these forms arranged in a fixed order, 
but these lists were not alphabetic until the final 
analysis into individual letters. 

The name alphabet comes from the first two letters 

of the Gr, al-pha beta, just as the old Eng. name for 

the alphabet, ahc or ahece, is simply 

2. Name the first three letters of the Eng. 

alphabet, and thus is merely an abbre- 
viation for the whole alphabet. It appears that the 
Greeks also used the first and last letters of the 
alphabet {alpha and omega) as the Jews did the 
first and last, or the first, middle and last letters 
of their alphabet, as abbreviation for the whole and 
in the same sense that in Eng. one says "a to izzard." 
Al-pha and beta are themselves derived from the 
Sem names for the same letters {'aleph, beth) and 
have no meaning in the Gr. 

The question of the invention of this alphabet 

differs from the question of the origin of the written 

forms of the letters with which it is 

3. Inven- often confused, and relates to the 
tion recognition of the individual letters. 

Alphabetical language whether written 
or spoken, inward or outward, is distinguished from 
the piotographic, hieroglyphic, and syllabic stages 
by this analysis into individual sounds or letters. 
It begins with the picture, passes to the ideogram 
and syllable, and from the syllable to the letter. 
This is best seen in writing, but it is equally true 
in speech. At the letter stage the alphabet begins. 
It is alleged by some that another stage, a con- 
sonantal writing, between syllabic and alphabetic 
writing, should be recognized. This would deny 
to the Phoen the character of a true alphabet since, 
as in all Sem languages, the vowels were anciently 
not written at all. Some go so far as to speak 
of it as syllabic in character, but on the other 
hand it may be said with equal pertinence that 
various syllabaries are nearly alphabetic. When a 

Phoenician, Cretan Linear Cretan Hiero- Reindeer 
etc A+B glyphs Period 






Primitive Signs like A. (Chiefly from Evans, 
Scripta minoa.) 

syllabic writing is reduced, as was the case with the 
Egyp, the Cypriote and others, to a point where a 
character represents uniformly a certain consonant 
and a certain vowel, the vocal analysis has been 
made and the essential alphabet begun, although 
it was only later that men discovered that the con- 
sonant common to several syllables might be ex- 
pressed to advantage in writing by one unvarying 
sign, and later still that the vowels too might be 
distinguished to advantage. 

Few modern questions are changing shape so 
rapidly as that of the historical predecessor of the 
Can or Phoen alphabet. For a long 
4. Origin time it was thought that De Rougi 
of the had solved the problem by tracing the 

Letters letters to the Egyp hieratic. This is the 

view of most of the popular literature 
of the present time, but is wholly surrendered by 
most workers in the field now, in spite of the fact 
that the latest studies in hieratic show a still greater 
resemblance in forms (MoUer, Hierat. Palao- 
graphie, 1909). Winckler and others have claimed 
derivation from the Cuneiform, Praetorius from the 
Cypriote, Sayce gets at least three letters from the 
Hittite, while Evans and others incline to believe 
that the Minoan was the direct source of the alpha- 
bet, introduced from Crete into Pal by the Philis 
who were Cretans, or at least that the two are 
from a common ancestor, which is also the ancestor 
of many other of the Mediterranean alphabets. 

Tlie Paestos Disk, Face A. 

Some, like Evans and Mosso, even suggest that, 
perhaps through the Minoan, the letter forms may 
be traced to the pictographs of the neolithic era 
in the caves of Europe. There is, in fact, an extra- 
ordinary resemblance between some of the letters 
of the Phoen alphabet and some of the conven- 
tionalized signs of the neolithic age, and it may 
not be too fantastic to imagine that these early signs 
are the historic ancestors of the written alphabetical 
characters, but that they were in any sense alphabet- 
ical themselves is impossible if the invention of the 
alphabet was historical as here supposed, and is 
unlikely from any point of view. 

If in fact the Paestos disk dates from before 
1600 BC, and if Dr. Hempl's resolution of it into 
Ionic Gr is sound, we have another possible source 
or stock of characters from which the inventor of 
the alphabet may have chosen ( Harper's Magazine, 
January, 1911). 

The ideal written alphabet contains a separate 
character for each sound used in any or every lan- 
guage. Practically in most languages 
5. Number the alphabet falls a good deal short of 
of Letters the number of recognized sounds to be 
expressed in that language and in pro- 
nouncing dictionaries they have to be analyzed into 
say a broad, a short, a open, etc, by adding dia- 
critical marks. "In educated English without re- 
garding finer distinctions" (Edmonds, Comparative 
Philology, 45) about 60 sounds are commonly used, 
but Murray distinguishes at least 96, and the number 
sometimes used or which may be used is much greater, 

Hiero- Hieratic Moab- Cartha- Egyptian- ■ Palmy- W 

glyphic itic ginian Aramaic rene 

^ i^ ^^ ^9^ t^ti^" a:^ s 

///.^ //, uuyv xj , 

N/*^^ l^-fc. 77;; j3 2 



^00 r^r \Y 



A A,^ 

a d 

"V c 

A A,D 

a B,H 
^ / 

O Oo 

n v,p 


Runic Goth Latin 









.1 X 

MM /v\ 
/VW ]\] 









/ r./ 


OoO O 

PI'P p 







2 Z 


^ N 









the possible number of vowel sounds alone being as 
many as 72. 

Moreover the individual letters differ in sound in 
different individuals, and even in the same individual 
in successive utterances of what would be called the 
same letter or the same sound. It is alleged that 
the average sound of the a for example, is never 
the same in any two languages; the a in "father," 
even, is never the same in any two individuals, 
and that the same individual, even, never pro- 
nounces it twice so exactly in the same fashion 
that the difference may not be detected by sound 

The written alphabet is always thus less than the 
number of sounds used. The Phoen and the Sem 
alphabets generally had 22 letters, but they omitted 
the vowels. English has 26, of which many have 
two or more sounds. 

The names of the Gr alphabet are derived from 
the Sem names and are meaningless in the Gr, 
while in the Sem it has been pretty 
6. Names clearly shown that they signify for 
of the the most part some object or idea of 

Letters which the earliest form of the written 

letter was a picture, as e.g. 'aleph, the 
ox." The forms of the letters are apparently derived 
from pictures of the ox, house, etc, made linear 
and finally reduced to a purely conventional sign 
which was itself reduced to the simplest writing 
motion. All this has been boldly denied by Mr. 
Pilcher {PSBA, XXVI [1904], 168-73; XXVII 
[1905], 65-68), and the original forms declared to 
be geometric; but he does not seem to have made 
many converts, although he has started up rival 
claimants to his invention. 

The names of the letters at least seem to indicate 
the Sem origin of the alphabet, since the majority 
of them are the Sem names for the objects which 
gave name to the letter, and the picture of which 
gives form to the written letter. 

Following is Sayce's list {PSBA, XXXII [1910], 
215-22) with some variants: (1) 'aleph = ox; (2) beth 
= house (tent); (3) ^iTOeZ = camel; (4) ddleth= dooi; 
(5) ft^ = house; (6) waw = na,i\ (Evans, tent peg); (7) 
zd2/m = weapon; (8) hilh = ieTice; (9) 0th = cake of 
bread (Lidzbarski, a package); (10) y6dh=ha,nd; 
(11) fcop/i = palm of hand; (12) lamedh = ox-go!id; 
(13) mim = w3,ter flowing; (14) niln=fish; (15) 
?amekh=?; (16) 'ayin = eye; (17) p^ = mouth; (18) 
gadhe = tTa,p (others, hook or nose or steps); (19) 
ifcop^ = cage (Evans says picture is an outline head 
and Lidzbarski, a helmet); (20) rish = head; (21) 
sMn = tooth (not teeth); (22) taiu = mark. Not all 
of these meanings are, however, generally accepted 
(cf also Noldeke, Beitrdge Strassb. [1904], 124-36; 
Lidzbarski, Ephemeris, II, 125-39). 

The order of the letters differs more or less in 
different languages, but it is in the main the same in 
all the Sem and Western alphabets 
7. Order derived from the Phoen alphabet and 
of Letters this is roughly the order of the Eng. 
alphabet. This order is, however, 
full of minor variations even among the Western 
alphabets and' in the Indian languages the letters 
are entirely regrouped on a different principle. 

The conventional order of the Semitic alphabet 
may be traced with some certainty in the Bibhcal 
books to as early as the 6th cent. BC, even accept- 
ing the dates of a radical higher criticism, for there 
are more than a dozen passages in the OT composed 
on the principle of the alphabetical acrostic (Pss 
111, 112, 119;Prov31 10-31; Lam 1, 2, 3, 4, etc) 
and the oldest of these are of this period (see 
Acrostic). .The Formello abecedarium, if it is in 
fact from the 7th cent. BC, carries the known order 
back a century farther still and shows it prevailing in 
Italy as well as Pal. Moreover there are those who 

still consider some of the alphabetical psalms older 
even than this. 

It must be noted, however, that while the order is 
in general fixed, there are local and temporary 
differences. In several cases e.g. the order of the 
sixteenth and seventeenth letters of the alphabet 
is inverted in the alphabetical acrostics, and this 
would seem to point to a time or place where pe, 
'ayin, was the accepted order. It happens that the 
inversion occurs in both the passages which are 
counted earliest by the modern critics (G. B. Gray 
in HDB^, 8). Mr. Sayoe too has recently altered 
or restored the order by relegating the original 
^amekh to a place after shtn, while Mr. Pilcher has 
quite reconstructed the original order on a geo- 
metrical basis, to his own taste at least, as brd; 
hvg; mnl; szt. 

Hebrew Inscribed Tablet from Gezer. 

A certain grouping together of signs according to 
the relationship of the objects which they repre- 
sent has often been noticed, and Sayce {PSBA, 
XXXII [1910], 215-22) thinks that he has (after 
having put ^amehh in its right place) reduced the 
whole matter to a sequence of pairs of things 
which belong together: ox-house, camel-tent door, 
house-nail, weapon-fence (city wall), bread-hand, 
open hand-arm with goad, water-fish, eye-mouth, 
trap-cage, head-tooth, ^amekh, law. This arranging 
he thinks was done by someone who knew that 
'aliXph was the West Sem for "leader" and taw was 
the Cretan sign for ending — an Amorite therefore 
in touch with the Phili. The final word on order 
seems not yet to have been spoken. 

The chief North Sem texts are (1) Moabite 
stone (cir 850 BC); (2) inscriptions of Zkr, Zen- 
jirli, etc (oir 800); (3) Baal-Lebanon 
8. The inscription (cir 750); (4) Siloam in- 

Earliest scription (cir 700 BC); (5) Harvard 
Texts Samaritan ostraca (time of Ahab?); 

(6) Gezer tablet; (7) various weights 
and seals before 600 BC. The striking fact 
about the earliest inscriptions is that however re- 
mote geographically, there is on the whole so 
little difference in the forms of the letters. This 




is particularly true of the North Sem inscriptions 
and tends to the inference that the invention was 
after all not so long before the surviving inscriptions. 
While the total amount of the earliest Pal inscrip- 
tions is not even yet very large, the recent dis- 
covery of the Sam ostraca, the Gezer tablet, and 
various minor inscriptions, is at least pointing to a 
general use of Sem writing in Pal at least as early 
as the 9th cent. BC. 

The tendency of letters to change form in con- 
sequence of changed environment is not pecuhar 
to alphabetical writing but is char- 
9. Changes acteristic of the transmission of all 
in Letter sorts of writing. The morphology 
Forms of alphabetical writing has however its 

own history. The best source for 
studying this on the Sem side is Lidzbarski's 
Handbuch (see below), and on the Gr side the best 
first source is E. S. Roberts, Intro to Gr Epigraphy 
(Cambr.). The best synoptical statement of the 
Sem is found in the admirable tables in the Jew 
Enc, V, i, 449-53. 

For the later evolution of both Gr and Lat alpha- 
bets, E. M. Thompson's Introduction to Greek and 
Latin Palaeography, Oxford, 1912, is far the best 
introduction. In this he takes account of the great 
finds of papyri which have so revolutionized the study 
of the forms of Greek letters around the beginning 
of the Christian era, since his first Handbook was 
published. (See arts, on the text of OT and NT.) 

In the Heb, the old Phoen alphabet of the early 
inscriptions had in the NT times given way to the 
square Aram, characters of the modern Heb which 
possibly came into use as early as the time of Ezra. 

The most comprehensive modern brief conspectus 
covering both Heb and Gr is that reproduced in this 
art. from the httle manual of Specht. See also 

LiTERATuKE. — Isaac Taylor's Alphabet (2d ed, 1899) 
is still useful for orientation, and his article in the HDB 
likewise, but Edward Clodd's little Story of the Alphabet 
(New York, 1907), taken with Faulmann's Geschichte 
der Schrift and Buch der Schrift, is better for general 
purposes. For scientiiic purposes see the bibUography 
prefixed to Lidzbarski's Handbuch der nordsemitischen 
Epigraphik (1898, 2 vols) and his Ephemeris passim to 
date, Evans' Scripta minoa. Oxf., 1909, and the lit. of the 
art. Whiting in this Encyclopaedia. See also C. G. 
Ball, "Origin of the Phoen Alphabet," PSBA, XV, 
392-408; E. J. Pilcher, "The Origin of the Alphabet," 
PSBA. XXVI (1904), 168-73; Pranz Praetorius, "The 
Origin of the Canaanite Alphabet," Smithsonian Rep. 
(1907), 595-604; S. A. Cook, " The Old Hebrew Alphabet 
and the Gezer Tablet," PEFS (1909), 284-309. For 
Bible class work, H. W. Skinner's Story of the Letters and 
Figures (Chicago, 1905) is very admirably adapted to 
the purpose. 

E. C. Richardson 

ALPHAEUS, al-fe'us ('A\<t)atos, Alphalos; WH, 
AX(t>aios, Halphaios) : 

(1) The father of the second James in the list of 
the apostles (Mt 10 3; Mk 3 18; Lk 6 15; Acts 
1 13). 

(2) The father of Levi, the pubhcan (Mk 2 14). 
Levi is designated as Matthew in the Gospel of 
Mt (9 9). There is no other reference to this 

Some writers, notably Weiss, identify the father 
of Levi with the father of the second James. He 
says that James and Levi were undoubtedly 
brothers; but that seems improbable. If they were 
brothers they would quite likely be associated as 
are James and John, Andrew and Peter. Chry- 
sostom says James and Levi had both been tax- 
gatherers before they became followers of Jesus. 
This tradition would not lend much weight as proof 
that they were brothers, for it might arise through 
identifying the two names, and the western MSS 
do identify them and read James instead of Levi 
in Mk 2 14. This, however, is undoubtedly a 
corruption of the text. If it had been the original 

it would be difficult to explain the substitution of 
an unknown Levi for James wheals well known. 

Many writers identify Alphaeus, the father of the 
second James, with Clopas of Jn 19 25. This had 
early become a tradition, and Chrysostom believed 
they were the same person. This identity rests on 
four suppositions, all of which are doubtful : 

(a) That the Mary of Clopas was the same as the 
Mary who was the mother of the second James. 
There is a difference of opinion as to whether "Mary 
of Clopas" should be understood to be the wife of 
Clopas or the daughter of Clopas, but the former is 
more probable. We know from Mt 27 56 and 
Mk 15 40 that there was a James who was the son 
of Mary, and that this Mary belonged to that little 
group of women that was near Jesus at the time 
of the crucifixion. It is quite likely that this Mary 
is the one referred to in Jn 19 25. 'That would 
make James, the son of Mary of Mt 27 56, the 
son of Mary of Clopas. But Mary was such a 
common name in the NT that this supposition 
cannot be proven. 

(6) That the James, who was the son of Mary, 
was the same person as the James, the son of 
Alphaeus. Granting the supposition under (a), 
this would not prove the identity of Clopas and 
Alphaeus unless this supposition can also be proven, 
but it seems impossible to either prove it or disprove 

(c) That Alphaeus and Clopas are different 
variations of a common original, and that the 
variation has arisen from different pronunciations 
of the first letter n (h) of the Aram, original. There 
are good scholars who both support and deny this 

(d) That Clopas had two names as was common 
at that time; but there is nothing to either sub- 
stantiate or disprove this theory. See Clopas. 

It seems impossible to determine absolutely 
whether or not Alphaeus, the father of the second 
James, and Clopas of Jn 19 25 are the same person, 
but it is quite probable that they are. 

A. W. Fortune 

ALSO, 61'so: In the Gr KaC, kal, when it is equiva- 
lent to "also" or "even," is always placed before 
the word or phrase which it is intended to emphasize 
(e.g. Acts 12 3; 1 Jn 4 21). Mt 6 14 should 
therefore read, "Your heavenly Father will forgive 
you also"; Lk 6 13, "Whom also he named apos- 
tles"; He 8 6, "The mediator of a better covenant 
also"; and 1 Thess 4 14, 'If we believe that Jesus 
died and rose again, so also [we believe that] those 
who are fallen asleep in Jesus, God will bring with 

ALTANEUS, al-ta-ne'us. 

See Maltannbus 

ALTAR, 61'ter (nSTia , mizbe^h, lit. "place of 
slaughter or sacrifice," from n^T , zabhah, which is 
found in both senses; Pw(j,6s, bomds [only in Acts 
17 23], Outriao-T-^piov, thusiasterion) : 
I. Classification of Hebrew Altars 
Importance of the Distinction 
II. Lay Altars 

1. Pre-Mosaic 

2. In the Mosaic Age 

3. Dangers of the Custom 

4. The Mosaic Provisions 

III. Horned Altars of Burnt Offering 

1. The Tabernacle Altar 

2. The Altar of Josh 22 

3. The Altar till Solomon 

4. The Horned Altar in Use 

5. The Temple of Solomon 

6. The Altar of Ahaz 

7. Ezekiel • 

8. The Post-exilic Altar 

9. Idolatrous and Unlawful Altars 
10. The Horns 

IV. Altars of Incense 




V. Recent Archaeological Materials 

1. A Gezer Altar 

2. The Taanach Altar of Incense 

A. Critical 
/. Classification of Hebrew Altars. — Before con- 
sidering the Biblical texts attention must be drawn 
to the fact that these texts know of at least two 

Fia. 1.— Calm Altar. 

kinds of altars which were so different in appearance 
that no contemporary could possibly confuse them. 
The first was an altar consisting of earth or unhewn 
stones. It had no fixed shape, but varied with the 

to note this distinction, and the reader can hope 
to make sense of the Biblical laws and narratives 
only if he be very careful to picture to himself in 
every case the exact object to which his text refers. 
For the sake of clearness different terms will be 
adopted in this article to denote the two kinds of 
altars. The first will be termed "lay altars" 
since, as will be seen, the Law permitted any lay- 
man to offer certain sacrifices at an altar of earth 
or unhewn stone without the assistance of a priest, 
while the second will be styled "horned altars," 
owing to their possession of horns which, as already 
pointed out, could not exist in a lay altar that con- 
formed with the provisions of the law. 

//. Lay Altars. — In Gen we often read of the 
erection of altars, e.g. 8 20; 12 7; 13 4. Though 
no details are given we are able to 
1. Pre- infer their general character with 

Mosaic considerable precision. In reading the 

accounts it is sometimes evident that 
we are dealing with some rough improvised structure. 
For example, when Abraham builds the altar for 

Fig. 2. — Altab of Burnt Offering and Altar of Incense. 

materials. It might consist of a rock (Jgs 13 19) 
or a single large stone (1 S 14 33-35) or again a 
number of stones (1 K 18 31 f). It could have 
no horns, for it would be impossible to give the stone 
horns without hewing it, nor would a heap of earth 
lend itself to the formation of horns. It could have 
no regular pattern for the same reason. On the 
other hand we meet with a group of passages that 
refer to altars of quite a different type. We read 
of horns, of fixed measurements, of a particular 
pattern, of bronze as the material. To bring home 
the difference more rapidly illustrations of the two 
types are given side by side. The first figure 
represents a cairn altar such as was in use in some 
other ancient rehgions. The second is a conjectural 
restoration of Heb altars of bm-nt offering and 
incense of the second kind. 

Both these might be and were called altars, but 
it is so evident that this common designation could 
not have caused any eye-witness to con- 
fuse the two that in reading the Bible 
we must carefully examine each text 
in turn and see to which kind the 
author is referring. Endless confusion 
has been caused, even in our own time, by the failure 

of the 

the sacrifice of Isaac in Gen 22 it cannot be supposed 
that he used metal or wrought stone. When Jacob 
makes a covenant with Laban a heap of stones is 
thrown up "and they did eat there by the heap" 
(31 46). This heap is not expressly termed an 
altar, but if this covenant be compared with later 
covenants it will be seen that in these its place is 
taken by an altar of the lay tjrpe {SBL, _ch 2), 
and it is reasonable to suppose that this heap was 
in fact used as an altar (cf ver 54). A further con- 
sideration is provided by the fact that the Arabs 
had a custom of using any stone as an altar for the 
nonce, and certainly such altars are found in the 
Mosaic and post-Mosaic history. We may there- 
fore feel sure that the altars of Gen were of the 
general type represented by Fig. 1 and were totally 
unlike the altars of Fig. 2. 

Thus Moses found a custom by which the Israelite 
threw up rude altars of the materials most easily 

obtained in the field and offered sacri- 
2. In the ficial worship to God on sundry oc- 
Mosaic casions. That the custom was not 

Age peculiar to the Israelites is shown by 

such instances as that of Balaam (Nu 
23 1, etc). Probably we may take the narrative 




of Jethro's sacrifice as a fair example of the occasions 
on which such altars were used, for it cannot be 
supposed that Aaron and all the elders of Israel 
were openly committing an unlawful act when they 
ate bread with Moses' father-in-law before God (Ex 
18 12). Again, the narrative in which we see Moses 
building an altar for the purposes of a covenant 
probably exemplifies a custom that was in use for 
other covenants that did not fall to be narrated 
(Ex 24 4ff). 

But a custom of erecting altars might easily 
lend itself to abuses. Thus archaeology has shown 
us one altar — though of a much later 
3. Dangers date — which is adorned with faces 
of the (Fig. 4), a practice that was quite con- 

Custom trary to the Mosaic ideas of preserv- 

ing a perfectly imageless worship. 
Other possible abuses were suggested by the current 
practices of the Canaanites or are explained by the 
terms of the laws. See High Place. 

Fig. 3. — Stone Altar of Gezer. 

Accordingly Moses regulated these lay altars. 
Leaving the occasion of their erection and use to 

be determined by custom he promul- 
4. The gated the following laws: "An altar 

Mosaic of earth mayest thou make unto me. 

Provisions and mayest sacrifice thereon thy 

burnt offerings and thy peace offerings, 
thy sheep, and thine oxen; in all the place where I 
record my name I will come unto thee and I wiU 
bless thee. And if thou make me an altar of 
stone, thou shalt not build it of hewn stones; for 
if thou lift thy tool upon it, thou hast polluted it. 
Neither mayest thou go up by steps unto mine 
altar," etc (Ex 20 24-26; so correct EV). Several 
remarks must be made on this law. It is a law for 
laymen, not priests. This is proved by the second 
person singular and also by the reason given for 
the prohibition of steps — since the priests were 
differently garbed. It applies "in all the place 
where I record my name," not, as the ordinary 
rendering has it, "in every place." This latter is 
quite unintelligible: it is usually explained as mean- 
ing places hallowed by theophanies, but there are 
plenty of instances in the history of lay sacrifices 
where no theophany can be postulated; see e.g. 
Gen 31 64; 1 S 20 6.29 {EPC, 185 f). "All the 

Elace" refers to the territory of Israel for the time 
eing. When Naaman desired to cease sacrificing 
to any deity save the God of Israel he was con- 
fronted by the problem of deciding how he could 
sacrifice to Him outside this "place." He solved 

it by asking for two mules' burden of the earth 
of the "place" (2 K 5 17). Lastly, as already 
noticed, this law excludes the possibility of giving 
the altars horns or causing them to conform to any 
given pattern, since the stone could not be wrought. 
One other law must be noticed in this connection: 
Dt 16 21 f : 'Thou shalt not plant thee an 'dsherah 
of any kind of tree beside the altar of the Lord thy 
God, which thou shalt make thee. Neither shalt 
thou set thee up a pillar, which the Lord thy God 
hateth.' Here again the reference is probably to 
the lay altars, not to the religious capital which 
was under the control of the priests. 

///. Horned Altars of Burnt Offering.— In Ex 

27 1-8 (cf 38 1-7) a command is given to construct 

for the Tabernacle an altar of shittim 

1. The wood covered with bronze. It was 
Tabernacle to be five cubits long by five broad 
Altar and three high. The four corners 

were to have horns of one piece with 
it. A network of bronze was to reach halfway up 
the altar to a ledge. In some way that is defined 
only by reference to what was shown to Moses in 
the Mount the altar was to be hollow with planks, 
and it was to be equipped with rings and staves for 
facility of transport. The precise construction 
cannot be determined, and it is useless to specu- 
late where the instructions are so plainly governed 
by what was seen by Moses in the Mount; but 
certain features that are important for the elucida- 
tion of the Bible texts emerge clearly. The altar 
is rectangular, presenting at the top a square sur- 
face with horns at the four corners. The more 
important material used is bronze, and the whole 
construction was as unlike that of the ordinary lay 
altar as possible. The use of this altar in the ritual 
of the Tabernacle falls under the heading Sacri- 
fices. Here we must notice that it was served 
by priests. Whenever we find references to the 
horns of an altar or to its pattern we see that the 
writer is speaking of an altar of this general type. 
Thus a criminal seeking asylum fled to an altar of 
this type, as appears from the horns which are 
mentioned in the two historical instances and also 
from such expressions as coming down or going up. 
See Asylum. 

We read in Josh 22 9 ff that the children of 
Reuben and the children of Gad built an altar. 

In ver 28 we find them saying, "Be- 

2. The hold the pattern of the altar," etc. 
Altar of This is decisive as to the meaning, 
Josh 22 for the lay altar had no pattern. Ac- 
cordingly in its general shape this 

altar must have conformed to the type of the Taber- 
nacle altar. It was probably not made of the same 
materials, for the word "build" is continually used 
in connection with it, and this word would scarcely 
be appropriate for working metal: nor again was 
it necessarily of the same size, but it was of the 
same pattern: and it was designed to serve as a 
witness that the descendants of the men who built 
it had a portion in the Lord.. It seems to follow 
that the pattern of the Tabernacle altar was dis- 
tinci:ive and unhke the heathen altars in general 
use in Palestine and this appears to be confirmed 
by modern excavations which have revealed high 
places with altars quite unhke those contemplated 
by the Pent. See High Place. 

In the subsequent history till the erection of 

Solomon's Temple attention need only be directed 

to the fact that a homed altar existed 

3. The while the Ark was still housed in a 
Altar till tent. This is important for two 
Solomon reasons. It shows a historical period 

in which a horned altar existed at the 
religious capital side by side with a number of lay 
altars all over the country, and it negatives the 




suggestion of G. A. Smith {Jerusalem, II, 64) that 
the bare rock es-§akhra was used by Solomon as 

the altar, since the unhewn rock ob- 
4- The viously could not provide a horned 

Horned Al- altar such as we find as early as 
tar in Use 1 K 1 50-53. Note too that we read 

here of bringing down from the altar, 
and this expression implies elevation. Further in 
9 25 we hear that Solomon was in the habit of 

Fig. 4. — Rock Altar from Taanach. 

offering on the altar which he had built, and this 
again proves that he had built an altar and did not 
merely use the temple rock. (See also Watson in 
PEFS [January, 1910], 15 ff, in reply to Smith.) 

For the reasons just given it is certain that Solo- 
mon used an altar of the homed type, but we have 
no account of the construction in K. 

5. The According to a note preserved in the 
Temple of L3CX but not in the Heb, Solomon 
Solomon enlarged the altar erected by David 

on Araunah's threshing-floor (2 S 
24 25), but this notice is of very doubtful historical 
value and may be merely a glossator's guess. 
According to 2 Ch 4 1 the altar was made of 
bronze and was twenty cubits by twenty by ten. 
The Chronicler's dimensions are doubted by many, 
but the statement of the material is confirmed 
by 1 K 8 64; 2 K 16 10-15. From the latter 
passage it appears that an altar of bronze had been 
in use tiU the time of Ahaz. This king saw an 

altar in Damascus of a different pat- 

6. The Al- tern and had a great altar made for 
tar of Ahaz the temple on its model. As the text 

contrasts the great altar with the altar 
of bronze, we may infer that the altar of Ahaz was 
not made of bronze. Whether either or both of 
these altars had steps (cf Ezk 43 17) or were 
approached by a slope as in Fig. 2 cannot be deter- 
mined with certainty. It may be noted that m 
Isa 27 9 we read of the stones of the altar m a 
passage the reference of which is uncertain. 

Ezekiel also gives a description of an altar (43 
13-17), but there is nothing to show whether it 

is purely ideal or represents the altar of Solomon 

or that of Ahaz, and modern writers take different 

views. In the vision it stood before 

7. Ezekiel the house (40 47). In addition he 

describes an altar or table of wood 
(41 22). This of course could only be a table, not 
in any sense an altar. See Table. 

Ezr 3 2 f tells of the setting up of the altar by 
Zerubbabel and his contemporaries. No informa- 
tion as to its shape, etc, can be ex- 

8. The tracted from this notice. We read 
Post-exilic of a defilement of the temple altar 
Altar in 1 Mace 1 54. This was made of 

stones (Ex 20 24-26 having at this 
date been applied to the temple altar contrary to 
its original intent) and a fresh altar of whole stones 
was constructed (1 Mace 4 44-49). Presumably 
this altar had no horns. 

It is clear from the historical and prophetical 
books that in both kingdoms a number of unlawful 

altars were in use. The distinction 

9. Idola- which has been drawn between lay 
trous altars and horned altars helps to 
Altars make these passages easy to under- 
stand. Thus when Amos in speaking 

of Bethel writes, "The horns of the altar shall be 
cut off," we see that he is not thinking of lay altars 
which could have no horns (3 14) . Again Hosea's 
"Because Ephraim hath multiplied altars 'to sin,' 
altars have been to him 'for sin " (8 11; cf 10 1-8; 
12 11 [12]), is not in contradiction to Ex 20 24-26 
because the prophet is not speaking of lay altars. 
The high places of Jeroboam (1 K 12 28-33) were 
clearly unlawful and their altars were unlawful 
altars of the horned type. Such cases must be 
clearly distinguished from the lay altars of Saul and 
others. , 

The origin of the horns is unknown, though there 
are many theories. Fugitives caught 

10. The hold of them (1 K 1. 50.51), and vic- 
Homs tims could be tied to them (Ps 118 


JV. Altars of Incense. — Ex 30 1-10 contains 
the commands for the construction and use of an 
altar of incense. The material was shittim wood, 
the dimensions one cubit by one by two, and it 
also had horns. Its top and sides were overlaid 
with gold and it was surrounded by a crown or 
rim of gold. For facihty of transport it had golden 
rings and staves. It stood before the veil in front 
of the ark. 

Solomon also constructed an altar of incense (1 K 
6 20; 7 48; 1 Ch 28 18), cedar replacing shittim 
wood. The altar of incense reappears in 1 Mace 1 
21; 4 49. 

Fig. 5.— Incense Altars ol Sandstone Found in the 
Rock Shrine at Sinai. 

V. Recent Archaeological Materials.— Recently 
several altars have been revealed by excavations. 
They throw light on the Bible chiefly by showing 
what is forbidden. See esp. High Place. Fig. 3 




represents an altar found at Gazer built into the 

foundation of a wall dating about 600 BC. Mr. 

Macalister describes it in the following 

1. A Gazer words: "It is a four-sided block of 
Altar limestone, 1 ft. 3 in. high. The top and 

bottom are approximately lOJ and 9 
in. square respectively; but these are only the aver- 
age dimensions of the sides, which are not regularly 
cut. The angles are prolonged upward for an addi- 
tional 1| in. as rounded knobs — ^no doubt the 'horns' 
of the altar. The top is very slightly concave so 
as to hold perhaps an eighth of a pint of liquid" 
{PEFS [July, 1907], 196 f). The size suggests an 
altar of incense rather than an altar of burnt offering, 
but in view of the general resemblance between the 
Tabernacle altars of burnt offering and incense, this 
is a fact of minor importance. On the other hand, 
the shape, pattern and material are of great interest. 
That the altar violates in principle the law of Ex 
20 25 forbidding the dressing of the stones is obvious, 
though that passage does not apply in terms to 
altars of incense, but certainly the appearance of 
the block does recall in a general way the altars of 
the other type — the horned altars. Like them it 
is four-sided with a square top, and like them it has 
knobs or horns at each corner. Possibly it was 
formed in general imitation of the Temple altars. 

Other altars in Can high places exemplify by their 
appearance the practices prohibited by the Pent. 
See for illustrations H. Vincent, Canaan d'aprbs 
I'exploration recente; R. Kittel, Studien zur hebrd- 
ischen Archaologie und Religions-Geschichte; S. R. 
Driver, Modern Research as Illustrating the Bible. 

Importance attaches to a terra cotta altar of 

incense found by SeUin at Taanach, because its 

height and dimensions at the base 

2. The recall the altar of Ex. "It was just 
Taanach 3 ft. high, and in shape roughly like a 
Altar of truncated p3Tamid, the four sides at 
Incense the bottom being each 18 in. long, and 

the whole ending at the top in a bowl 

a foot in diameter The altar is hollow 

Professor Sellin places the date of the altar at about 

700 BC An incense-altar of exactly the 

same shape .... but of much smaller size .... 
has been found quite recently at Gezer in debris of 
about 1000-600 BC"_(Driver, Modern Research, etc, 
85). These discoveries supply a grim comment on 
the theories of those critics who maintain that 
incense was not used by the Hebrews before the 
time of Jer. The form of the altar itself is as 
contrary to the principles of the Pent law as any 
thing could be. 

On altar furniture see Pots; Shovels; Basins; 
Flbsh-hooks; Firepans. On the site. Temple, 
and generally, Ariel; Sacrifice; Sanctuary; 
Tabernacle; High Place. 

LiTERATUHE. — R. Kittcl, Studien zur hebrdischen Ar~ 
ch&ologie und Religions-Geschichte, I and II; Hastings, 
Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics; Murray, Illustrated 
Bible Dictionary: EB,s.v."Alta,T"; E PC, eh 6. The dis- 
cussions in the ordinary works of reference must be used 
with caution for the reason given in / above. 

Harold M. Wiener 

B. In Worship 
I. In Worship: Tabehnacle and Temples 

1. Patriarchal Altars 

2. Sacred Sites 

3. Pre-Tabernacle Altars 

II. The Altar of Burnt Offering ^Brazen Altar) 

1. Altar before the Tabernacle 

2. Its History 

3. Altar of Solomon's Temple 

4. Altar of Bzekiel's Temple 

5. Altar of Second Temple 

6. Altar of Herod's Temple 

III. The Altar of Incense (Golden Altar) 

1. In the Tabernacle 

2. Mode of Burning Incense 

3. In Solomon's Temple and Later 

4. In Herod's Temple 

5. SymboUsm of Incense Burning 

/. In Worship: Tabernacle and Temples. — In 

the literature of the Bible, sacrifices are prior 
to altars, and altars prior to sacred 

1. Patri- buildings. Their first mention is in 
archal the case of the altar built by Noah 
Altars after the Flood (Gen 8 20). The 

next is the altar built at the place of 
Shechem, by which Abraham formally took posses- 
sion, on behalf of his descendants, of the whole 
land of Canaan (Gen 12 7). A second altar was 
built between Bethel and Ai (ver 8). To this the 
patriarch returned on his way from Egypt (Gen 
13 4). His next place of sacrifice was Hebron 
(ver 18); and tradition still professes to show the 
place where his altar stood. A subsequent altar 
was built on the top of a mountain in the land of 
Moriah for the sacrifice of Isaac (Gen 22 9). 

Each of these four spots was the scene of some 

special revelation of Jehovah ; possibly to the third 

of them (Hebron) we may attribute 

2. Sacred the memorable vision and covenant 
Sites of Gen 15. These sites became, in 

after years, the most venerated and 
coveted perquisites of the nation, and fights for 
their possession largely determined its history. To 
them Isaac added an altar at Beersheba (Gen 26 
25), probably a reerection, on the same site, of an 
altar built by Abraham, whose home for many 
years was at Beersheba. Jacob built no new altars, 
but again and again repaired those at Shechem and 
Bethel. On one occasion he offered a sacrifice 
on one of the mountains of Gilead, but without 
mention of an altar (Gen 31 54). There were 
thus Tour or five spots in Canaan associated at 
once with the worship of Jehovah, and the name of 
their great ancestor, which to Hebrews did not lose 
their sanctity by the passage of time, viz. Shechem, 
Bethel, Hebron, Moriah and Beersheba. 

The earliest provision for an altar as a portion of 

a fixed establishment of rehgion is found in Ex 20 

24-26, immediately after the pro- 

3. Pre- mulgation of the Decalogue. Altars are 
Tabernacle commanded to be made of earth or 
Altars of unhewn stone, yet so as to have, 

not steps, but only slopes for ascent 
to the same — ^the injunction implying that they 
stood on some elevation (see Altar, A, above). 
Before the arrival at Sinai, during the war with 
Amalek, Moses had built an emergency altar, to 
which he gave the name Jehovah-Nissi (Ex 17 15). 
This was probably only a memorial altar (cf the 
altar Ed in Josh 22 21 ff). At Sinai took place the 
great crisis in Israel's national history. It was 
required that the covenant about to be made with 
Jehovah should be ratified with sacrificial blood; but 
before Moses could sprinkle the Book of the Cove- 
nant and the people who covenanted (Ex 24 6.7; 
cf He 9 19), it was necessary that an altar should 
be built for the sacrificial act. This was done 
"under the mount," where, beside the altar, were 
reared twelve pillars, emblematic of the twelve 
tribes of Israel (ver 4). 

In connection with the tabernacle and the suc- 
cessive temples there were two altars— the Altar of 
Burnt Offering (the altar by preeminence, Ezk 43 
13), and the Altar of Incense. Of these it is now 
necessary to speak more particularly. 

//. The Altar of Burnt Offering (nb^yn HST'D, 
mizbah ha-'dlah), The Brazen Altar (naflQ 

nTpnan, mizbah ha-n'hosheth). — 
1. Altar be- (By "brass" throughout understand 
fore the "bronze.") The altar which stood 
Tabernacle before the tabernacle was a portable 

box constructed of acacia wood and 
covered on the outside with plates of brass (Ex 27 
Iff). "Hollow with planks," is its definition 




(ver 8) . It was five cubits long, five cubits broad, 
and three cubits high; on the ordinary reckoning, 
about 7j ft. on the horizontal square, and 4| ft. 
in height (possibly less; see Cubit). On the "grat- 
ing of network of brass" described as around and 
half-way up the altar (vs 4.5), see Grating. Into 
the corners of this grating, on two sides, rings were 
riveted, into which the staves were inserted by 
which the Ark was borne (see Staves). For its 
corner projections, see Horns op the Altar. The 
prohibition of steps in Ex 20 26 and the analogy 
of later altars suggest that this small altar before the 
tabernacle was made to stand on a base or platform, 
led up to by a slope of earth. The right of sanctuary 
is mentioned in Ex 21 14. For the utensils con- 
nected with the altar, see Pans; Shovels; Basins; 
Flesh-Hooks; Censees. All these utensils were 
made of brass. 

The history of the altar before the tabernacle was 

that of the tabernacle itself, as the two were not 

parted during its continuance (see 

2. Its Tabernacle). Their abolition did 
History not take place till Solomon's temple 

was ready for use, when the great 
high place at Gibeon (1 K 3 4) was dismantled, 
and the tabernacle and its holy vessels were brought 
to the new temple (8 4). Another altar had mean- 
while been raised by David before the tabernacle 
he had made on Zion, into which the Ark of the 
Covenant was moved (1 Ch 15 1; 16 1). This 
would be a duplicate of that at Gibeon, and would 
share its supersession at the erection of the first 

In Solomon's temple the altar was considerably 

enlarged, as was to be expected from the greater 

size of the building before which it 

3. Altar of stood. We are indebted to the 
Solomon's Chronicler for its exact dimensions 
Temple (2 Ch 4 1). It formed a square of 

twenty cubits, with an elevation of 
ten cubits (30X30X15 ft.; or somewhat leas). 
It is described as "an altar of brass" (2 Ch 4 1), 
or "brazen altar" (1 K 8 64; 2 Ch 7 7; cf 2 K 
16 14), either as being, like its predecessors, encased 
in brass, or, as others think, made wholly of brass. 
It was not meant to be portable, but that the altar 
itself was movable is shown by the fact of Ahaz 
having it removed (2 K 16 14). Further details 
of its structure are not given. The altar stood in 
"the middle of the court that was before the house," 
but proved too small to receive the gifts on the day 
of the temple's dedication (1 K 8 64; 2 Ch 7 7). 
It remained, however, the center of Israehtish wor- 
ship for 2i centuries, till Ahaz removed it from the 
forefront of the house, and placed it on the northern 
side of his Damascene altar (2 K 16 14). This 
indignity was repaired by Hezekiah (cf 2 K 18 
22), and the altar assumed its old place m the 
temple service till its destruction by Nebuchadnez- 
zar in 586 BC. 

The altar of Ezekiel's ideal temple was, as 

planned, a most elaborate structure, the cubit used 

for this purpose being that of a 

4. Altar of cubit and an handbreadth" (Ezk 43 
Ezekiel's 13), or the large cubit of history (see 
Temple Cubit). The paragraph describing 

it (43 13-17) is very specific, though 
uncertainty rests on the meaning of some of the 
details. The altar consisted of four stages lying 
one above another, gradually diminishing in size 
till the hearth was reached upon which the fare was 
lit. This was a square of twelve cubits (18 tt.), 
from the corners of which 4 horns projected up- 
ward (ver 15). The base or lowest stage was one 
cubit in height, and had a border round about, 
half a cubit high (ver 13); the remaining stages 
were two, four, and four cubits high respectively 

(vs 14.15); the horns may have measured another 
cubit (thus LXX). Each stage was marked by the 
inlet of one cubit (vs 13.14). The basement was 
thus, apparently, a square of eighteen cubits or 27 ft. 
The word "bottom" (lit. "bosom") in Ezekiel's de- 
scription is variously interpreted, some regarding it 
as a "drain" for carrying off the sacrificial blood, 
others identifying it with the "basement." On its 
eastern face the altar had steps looking toward the 
east (ver 17) — -a, departure from the earlier practice 
(for the reason of this, cf Perowne's art. "Altar" 
in DB). 

Of the altar of the second temple no measure- 
ments are given. It is told only that it 

5. Altar was built prior to the temple, and was 
of Second set upon its base (Ezr 3 3), presum- 
Temple ably on the Sakhra stone — ^the ancient 

In Herod's temple a difficulty is found in harmo- 
nizing the accounts of the Mish and Jos as to the 
size of the altar. The latter gives 

6. Altar of it as a square of fifty cubits {BJ, 
Herod's V, v, 6). The key to the solution 
Temple probably Ues in distinguishing be- 
tween the structure of the altar proper 

(thirty-two cubits square), and a platform of larger 
area (fifty cubits square = 75 ft.) on which it stood. 
When it is remembered that the Sakhra stone is 
56 ft. in length and 42 ft. in width, it is easy to see 
that it might form a portion of a platform built 
up above and around it to a level of this size. The 
altar, like that of Ezekiel's plan, was built in di- 
minishing stages; in the Mish, one of one cubit, 
and three of five cubits in height, the topmost 
stage measuring twenty-six cubits square, or, with 
deduction of a cubit for the officiating priests, 
twenty-four cubits. Jos, on the other hand, gives 
the height at fifteen cubits. The altar, as before, 
had 4 horns. Both Jos and the Mish state that the 
altar was built of unhewn stones. The ascent, 
thirty-two cubits long and sixteen broad, likewise 
of unhewn stone, was on the south side. See further. 
Temple, Hekod's. It is of this altar that the 
words were spoken, "Leave there thy gift before 
the altar, and go thy way, first be reconciled to thy 
brother, and then come and offer thy gift" (Mt 
5 24). 

///. The Altar of Incense (n7lbj?n naTKI , mizbah 
ha-lftoreth), Golden Altar (3njn nSTa, mizbah 

ha-zahabh). — This was a_ diminutive 
1. In the table of acacia overlaid with gold, the 
Tabernacle upper surface of which was a square of 

one cubit, and its height two cubits, 
with an elevated cornice or crown around its top 
(Ex 30 2 ff ) . Like the great altar of burnt offering, 
it was in the category of "most holy" things (Ex 
30 10); a distinction which gave it a right to a 
place in the inner room of the cella or holy of holies. 
Hence, in 1 K 6 22, it is said to "belong to the 
oracle," and in He 9 4 that chamber is said to 
have the "altar of incense." It did not, however, 
actually stand there, but in the outer chamber, 
"before the veil" (Ex 40 26). The reason for this 
departure from the strict rule of temple ritual was 
that sweet incense was to be burnt daily upon it 
■at the offering of every daily sacrifice, the lamps 
being then fit and extinguished (cf Nu 28 3f; 
Ex 30 7.8), so that a cloud of smoke might fill the 
inner chamber at the moment when the sacrificial 
blood was sprinkled (see Mercy -seat). To have 
burnt this incense within the veil would have 
required repeated entries into the holy of holies, 
which entries were forbidden (Lev 16 2). The 
altar thus stood immediately without the veil, 
and the smoke of the incense burnt upon it entered 
the inner chamber by the openings above the veil. 




For the material construction which adroitted of 
this, see Holy Place. 

For other uses of the altar of incense see Horns 
OF THE Altae, where it is shown that at the time of 
the offerings of special sin offerings and on the day 
of the annual fast its horns were sprinkled with 
blood. This, with the offering of incense upon it, 
were its only uses, as neither meal offerings might 
be laid upon it, nor hbations of drink offerings poured 
thereon (Ex 30 9). The Tamid, or standing sacri- 
fice for Israel, was a whole burnt offering of a lamb 
offered twice daily with its meal offering, accompa- 
nied with a service of incense. 

It is probable that the censers in use at the time of 

the construction of this altar and after were in shape 

like a spoon or ladle (see Table of 

2. Mode of Shewbrbad), which, when filled with 
Burning live coals from the great altar, were 
Incense carried within the sanctuary and laid 

upon the altar of incense (Lev 16 12). 
The incense-sticks, broken small, were then placed 
upon the coals. The narrative of the deaths of 
Aaron's sons, Nadab and Abihu, is thus made in- 
telligible, the fire in their censers not having been 
taken from the great altar. 

The original small altar made by Moses was super- 
seded by one made by Solomon. This was made of 

cedar wood, overlaid with gold (1 K 

3. In 6 20.22; 7 48; 9 25; 2 Ch 4 19); 
Solomon's hence was called the "golden altar." 
Temple and This was among "all the vessels of 
Later the house of God, great and small," 

which Nebuchadnezzar took to Babylon 
(2 Ch 36 18). As a consequence, when Ezekiel 
drew plans for a new temple, he gave it an incense 
altar made wholly of wood and of larger dimensions 
than before (Ezk 41 22). It had a height of three 
cubits and a top of two cubits square. There was 
an incense altar likewise in the second temple. It 
was this altar, probably plated with gold, which 
Antiochus Epiphanes removed (1 Mace 1 21), and 
which was restored by Judas Macoabaeus (1 Mace 
4 49). (On critical doubts as to the existence of 
the golden altar in the first and second temples, cf 
POT, 323.) 

That the Herodian temple also had its altar of 

incense we know from the incident of Zacharias 

having a vision there of "an angel .... 

4. In standing on the right side of the altar of 
Herod's incense" when he went into the temple 
Temple of the Lord to bm-n incense (Lk 1 11). 

No representation of such an altar ap- 
pears on the arch of Titus, though it is mentioned 
by Jos {BJ, V, V, 5). It was probably melted down 
by John during the course of the siege (V, xiii, 6). 

In the apocalypse of John, no temple was in the 
restored heaven and earth (Rev 21 22), but in the 

earlier part of the vision was a temple 

5. Symbol- (Rev 14 17; 15 6) with an altar and 
ism of a censer (8 3). It is described as 
Incense "the golden altar which was before the 
Burning throne," and, with the smoke of its 

incense, there went up before God the 
prayers of the saints. This imagery is in harmony 
with the statement of Lk that as the priests burnt 
incense, "the whole multitude of the people were 
praying without at the hour of incense" (1 10).* 
Both history and prophecy thus attest the abiding 
truth that salvation is by sacrificial blood, and is 
made available to men through the prayers of 
saints and sinners offered by a great High Priest. 
W. Shaw Caldecott 
AL-TASHHETH, al-tash'heth, AL-TASCHITH, 
al-tas' kith. See Psalms; Song. 

ALTOGETHER, 61-t6o-geth'er : Representing five 
Heb and three Gr originals, which variously sig- 

nify (1) "together"; i.e. all, e.g. 'all men, high 
and low, weighed together in God's balance are 
fighter than vanity' (Ps 62 9); so also 63 3; 
Jer 10 8. (2) "all": so RV, Isa 10 8: "Are not 
my princes all of them kings?" (3) "with one 
accord have broken the yoke"; so RV, Jer 5 5. 

(4) "completely," "entirely," "fully": "so as not to 
destroy him altogether" (2 Ch 12 12; cf Gen 18 
21; Ex 11 1; Ps 39 5; Jer 30 11 AV; cf RV). 

(5) "wholly": "altogether born in sins," Jn 9 34. 

(6) In 1 Cor 5 10 RV rendered "at all"; 1 Cor 9 
10 "assuredly." (7) A passage of classic diflSculty 
to translators is Acts 26 29, where "altogether" 
in RV is rendered "with much," Gr en megdlo 

{en polio). See Almost. Many of the instances 
where "altogether" occurs in AV become "together" 
in RV. Used as an adj. in Ps 39 5 ("altogether 
vanity"). Dwight M. Pratt 

ALUSH, a'lush (ffl'ibi? , 'dlush) : A desert camp of 
the Israelites between Dophkah and Rephidim (Nu 
33 13.14). The situation is not certainly known. 
See Wanderings of Israel. 

ALVAH, al'va (Hlby , 'alwah): A chief (AVduke) 
of Edom (Gen 36 40), called "Aliah" in 1 Ch 1 
61. Probably the same as Alvan, or Allan, son of 
Shobal son of Seir (Gen 36 23; 1 Ch 1 40). 

ALVAN, al'van ("lb?, 'alwan, "tall"?): A son of 
Shobal, the Horite (Gen 36 23). In 1 Ch 1 40 the 
name is written Alian, LXX 'OXd/i. It is probably 
the same as Alvah of Gen 36 23, which appears in 
1 Ch 1 51 as Aliah. 

ALWAY, 6rwa (archaic and poetic); ALWAYS, 
61'waz: Properly applied to acts or states perpet- 
ually occurring, but not necessarily continuous. 
In Heb, most frequently, Ti^ri, tamldh. In Gr 
Sid, iravT(5s, did pantds, ordinarily expresses con- 
tinuity. In Mt 28 20 ''alway" AV, RV "always," 
tr Gr pdsas tds hem4ras, "all the days," cor- 
responding to the Heb idiom similarly rendered in 
Dt 5 29; 6 24; 11 1; 28 33; 1 K 11 36, etc. 
Gr aei in Acts 7 51; 2 Cor 6 10; 1 Pet 3 15, 
means "at every and any time." 

AMAD, a'mad (H^^?, 'am'adh): A town in 
northern Pal, which fell to the tribe of Asher in the 
division of the land (Josh 19 26). The modern 
ruin 'Amud near Accho may be the site. 

AMADATHA, a-mad'a-tha, AMADATHUS, a- 

mad'a-thus (Ad Est 12 6) . See Aman; Hammed atha. 

AMAIN, a-man' (tr'* from the Gr «ts ^vyr\v 
up|iT|(rav, eis phugtn hormesan, "they rushed to 
flight"): The word is composed of the prefix "a" 
and the word "main," meaning "force." The 
expression is used by Milton, Parker, et al., but in 
Bib. fit. found only in 2 Mace 12 22 where it is 
used to describe the flight of Timotheus and his 
army after he suffered defeat at the hands of Judas 
Maccabee ("They fled amain," i.e. violently and 
suddenly) . 

AMAL, a'mal {^"OS , 'amal, "toiler"): A son of 
Helem of the tribe of Asher (1 Ch 7 35). 

AMALEK, am'a-lek (pb'gy , 'dmalek) : The son, 
by his concubine Timna, of Eliphaz, the eldest son 
of Esau. He was one of the chiefs (AV dukes) of 
Edom (Gen 36 12.16). See Amalekitb. 

AMALEK, am'a-lek, AMALEKITE, a-mal'e-kit, 

am'a-lek-it (p?'0^ , ^dmalek, ""pb^? , 'dmalejp.) : 
A tribe dwelling originally in the region south of 




Judah, the wilderness of et-Tih where the Israelites 
came into conflict with them. They were nomads 
as a people dwelling in that tract would naturally 
be. When they joined the Midianites to invade 
Israel they came "with their cattle and their tents" 
(Jgs 6 3-6). They are not to be identified with 
the descendants of Esau (Gen 36 12.16) because 
they are mentioned earlier, in the account of the 
invasion of Chedorlaomer (Gen 14 7) and in 
Balaam's prophecy (Nu 24 20) A. is called "the 
first of the nations," which seems to refer to an 
early existence. We are uncertain of their origin, 
for they do not appear in the list of nations found 
in Gen 10. They do not seem to have had any 
relationship with the tribes of Israel, save as, we 
may surmise, some of the descendants of Esau were 
incorporated into the tribe. It is probable that they 
were of Sem stock though we have no proof of it. 

The first contact with Israel was at Rephidim, 
in the wilderness of Sinai, where they made an un- 
provoked attack and were defeated after a desper- 
ate conflict (Ex 17 8-13; Dt 25 17.18). On ac- 
count of this they were placed under the ban and 
Israel was commanded to exterminate them (Dt 
25 19; 1 S 15 2.3). The next encounter of the 
two peoples was when the Israelites attempted to 
enter Canaan from the west of the Dead Sea. The 
spies had reported that the Amalekites were to be 
found in the south, in connection with the Hittites, 
Jebusites and Amorites (Nu 13 29). The Israel- 
ites at first refused to advance, but later deter- 
mined to do so contrary to the wiU of God and the 
command of Moses. They were met by A. and 
the Canaanites and completely defeated (Nu 14 
39-45). A. is next found among the allies of Moab 
in their attack upon Israel in the days of Eglon 
(Jgs 3 13). They were also associated with the 
Midianites in their raids upon Israel (Jgs 6 3), 
and they seemed to have gained a foothold in 
Ephraim, or at least a branch of them, in the hill 
country (Jgs 5 14; 12 15), but it is evident that 
the great body of them still remained in their old 
habitat, for when Saul made war upon them he drove 
them toward Shur in the wilderness toward Egypt 
(1 S 15 1-9). David also found them in the same 
region (1 S 27 8; 30 1). After this they seem 
to have decUned, and we find, in the days of Heze- 
kiah, only a remnant of them who were smitten by 
the Simeonites at Mount Seir (1 Ch 4 41-43). 
They are once mentioned in Pss in connection with 
other inveterate enemies of Israel (Ps 83 7). The 
hatred inspired by the Amalekites is reflected in the 
passages already mentioned which required their 
utter destruction. Their attack upon them when 
they were just escaped from Egypt and while they 
were struggling through the wilderness made a 
deep impression upon the Israelites which they 
never forgot, and the wrath of David upon the 
messenger who brought him news of the death of 
Saul and Jonathan, declaring himself to be the 
slayer of Saul, was no doubt accentuated by his 
being an Amalekite (2 S 1 1-16). H. Porter 

AMAM, a'mam (OBS, 'Smam) : An unidentified 
town in southern Pal' which fell to Judah in the 
allotment of the land; occurs only in Josh 15 26. 

AMAN, a'man ('A|idv, Amdn; B reads 'ASAji, 
Addm): Tob 14 10; Ad Est 12 6; 16 10.17, prob- 
ably in each case for Haman, the arch-enemy of the 
Jews in the canonical Book of Est (cf Est 3 1 with 
Ad Est 12 6). In Ad Est (16 10) Aman is repre- 
sented as a Macedonian, in all other points corre- 
sponding to the Haman of Est. 

AMANA, a-ma'na, a-mii'na (njpS, 'Umanah): 
A mountain mentioned in Cant 4 8 along with 

Lebanon, Senir and Hermon. The name probably 
means the "firm," or "constant." "From the top 
of Amana" is mistr'' by the LXX iiri dpx^s wLa-Tews, 
ap6 archts plsleos. The Amana is most naturally 
sought in the Anti-Lebanon, near the course of the 
river Abana, or Amana (see Abanah) . Another 
possible identification is with Mt. Amanus in the 
extreme north of Syria. 

AMARIAH, am-a-rl'a (n^'llOill, 'dmaryah, and 
ITTjniaS, 'dmaryahu, "the Lord has said" ; ciHPN, 
180, 285): (1) A Levite in the line of Aaron- 
Eleazar; a son of Meraioth and grandfather of 
Zadok (1 Ch 6 7.52) who lived in David's time. 
Cf Zadok (2 S 15 27, etc) also Ant, VIII, i, 3 and 
X, viii, 6. (2) A Levite in the line of Kohath- 
Hebron referred to in 1 Ch 23 19 and 24 23 at the 
time when David divided the Levites into courses. 

(3) A Levite in the line of Aaron-Eleazar; a son of 
Azariah who "executed the priest's office in the 
house that Solomon built" (1 Ch 6 10 f). Cf 
Ezr 7 3 where in the abbreviated Ust this Am. is 
mentioned as an ancestor of Ezra. See Amarias 
(1 Esd 8 2; 2 Esd 1 2) and no. (4) of this art. 

(4) Chief priest and judge "in all matters of Jehovah" 
appointed by Jehoshaphat (2 Ch 19 11). Possi- 
bly identical with Am. no. (3). (5) A descendant 
of Judah in the line of Perez and an ancestor 
of Ataiah who lived in Jerus after the Bab exile 
(Neh 11 4). Cf Imri (1 Ch 9 4) and no. (7) of 
this art., which Am. seems to be of the same family, 
(6) A Levite and an assistant of Kore who was ap- 
pointed by Hezekiah to distribute the "oblations of 
Jehovah" to their brethren (2 Ch 31 15). (7) A 
son of Bani who had married a foreign woman 
(Ezr 10 42). See no. (5) of this art. (8) A priest 
who with Nehemiah sealed the covenant (Neh 10 
3) ; he had returned to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel 
(Neh 12 2) and was the father of Jehohanan (cf 
Hanani, Ezr 10 20), priest at the time of Joiakim 
(Neh 12 13). Cf Immer (Ezr 2 37; 10 20; Neh 
7 40) and also Emmeruth (AV "Meruth," 1 Esd 6 
24). (9) An ancestor of Zephaniah, the prophet 
(Zeph 11). A. L. Brbslich 

AMARIAS, am-a-rl'as (A, 'A(i.apCas, Amarias; B, 
'A|xap6c[as, Amartheias) = Avaaxi^ no. 3: An an- 
cestor of Ezra (1 Esd 8 2; 2 Esd 1 2). 

AMARNA, TELL EL-, tel-el-a-mar/na. See Tell 
el-Amarna Tablets. 

AMASA, a-ma'sa (STBloy , 'Amasa', or read "'WQV , 
'ammishai, i.e. "'TB'? D? , 'am yishai, "people of 
Jesse"): The form Sffi'ay, is based upon a mis- 
taken etymology (from = 0^23? ['ama^\ "to burden"). 

(1) According to 2 S 17 25, Amasa is the son of 
Abigail, the sister of Zeruiah and David, and 
Ithra, an IsraeUte; but another source, 1 Ch 2 17, 
calls his father Jether the Ishmaelite. He was a 
nephew of David and a cousin of Absalom, who 
made him commander of the army of rebellion. 
When the uprising had been quelled, David, in 
order to conciliate Amasa, promised him the position 
held by Joab; the latter had fallen from favor (2 
S 19 13 ff). When a new revolt broke out under 
Sheba, the son of Bichri (2 S 20), Amasa was 
intrusted with the task of assembling the men of 
Judah. But Joab was eager for revenge upon the 
man who had obtained the office of comrnand that 
he coveted. When Amasa met Joab at Gibeon, the 
latter murdered him while pretending to salute 
him (2 S 20 8-10; 1 K 2 5). 

(2) Son of Hadlai, of the B'ne 'Ephrayim ("Chil- 
dren of Ephraim"), who, obeying the words of the 
prophet Oded, refused to consider as captives the 




Judaeans who had been taken from Ahaz, king of 
Judah, by the victorious Israehtes under the lead- 
ership of Pekah (2 Ch 28 12). H.J, Wolf 

AMASAI, a-ma'sl C^??^? , 'dmasay, perhaps 
rather to be read "^iBTSy , 'ammishay; so Wellhausen, 
IJG, II, 24, n.2): 

(1) A name in the genealogy of Kohath, son of 
Elkanah, a Levite of the Kohathite family (cf 1 Ch 
6 25; 2 Ch 29 12). 

(2) Chief of the captains who met David at Zik- 
lag and tendered him their allegiance. Some have 
identified him with Amasa and others with Abishai, 
who is called Abshai in 1 Ch 11 20m (cf 1 Ch 18 
12). The difficulty is that neither Amasa nor 
Abishai occupied the rank of the chief of thirty 
according to the lists in 2 S 23 and 1 Ch 11, the 
rank to which David is supposed to have appointed 
him (cf 1 Ch 12 18). 

(3) One of the trumpet-blowing priests who 
greeted David when he brought back the Ark of 
the Covenant (cf 1 Ch 15 24). 

AMASHSAI, a-mash'si ("^0125:0? , 'dmash^ay, prob- 
ably a textual error for ""Tppy , ^amashay; the D [s] 
implies a reading "'D'Qy, based on a mistaken deri- 
vation from Day . The original reading may have 
been ''iCTSy , 'ammishay; cf Amasai) : Amashsai is a 
priestly name in the post-exilic list of inhabitants of 
Jerus (Neh 11.13; Maasai, 1 Ch 9 12); the read- 
ing in Ch is ''W'Q, ma'asay, AV "Maasiai," RV 

AMASIAH, am-a-si'a (H^D'ar , 'd,ma§yah, "Yahwe 
bears"): One of the captains of Jehoshaphat (cf 
2 Ch 17 16). 

AMATH, a'math, AMATHIS, am'a-this (1 Mace 
12 25). SeeHAMATH. 

AMATHEIS, am-a-the'is. See Ematheis. 

AMAZED, a-mazd': A term which illustrates 
the difficulty of expressing in one Eng. word the 
wide range of startled emotion, wonder, astonish- 
ment, awe, covered, in the OT, by four Heb words 
and in the NT by as many Gr words. Its Scripture 
originals range in meaning from amazement ac- 
companied with terror and trembling to an astonish- 
ment full of perplexity, wonder, awe and joyous 
surprise. It is the word esp. used to show the effect 
of Christ's miracles, teaching, character and Divine 
personahty on those who saw and heard Him, and 
were made conscious of His supernatural power (Mt 
12 23: "AU the multitudes were amazed"). The 
miracles of Pentecost and the Holy Spirit's bestowal 
of the gift of tongues produced the same universal 
wonder (Acts 2 7: "They were all amazed and mar- 
velled"). DwiGHT M. Pratt 

AMAZIAH, am-a-zi'a (n^a'aS, in^^'aSI, '&mag- 
yah, 'dmagyahu, "Jehovah is mighty"; 2 K 14 
1-20; 2 Ch 25): Son of Jehoash, and tenth king 
of Judah. Amaziah had a peaceable accession at 
the age of 25. A depleted treasury, a despoiled 
palace and temple, and a discouraged people were 
among the consequences of his father s war with 
Hazael, king of Syria. When settled on the throne, 
Amaziah brought to justice the men who had 
assassinated his father. A verbal citation of Dt 
24 16 in 2 K 14 6, forbidding the punishment of 
children for a father's offence, shows that the laws 
of this book were then known, and were recog- 
nized as authoritative, and, in theory, as govern- 
ing the nation. His accession may be dated cir 
812 (some put later). 

The young king's plan for the rehabilitation of 

his people was the restoration of the kingdom's 

military prestige, so severely lowered 

1. The in his father's reign. A militia army, 
Edomite composed of all the yoimg men above 
War 20 years of age, was first organized 

and placed upon a war footing (2 Ch 
25 5; the number given, 300,000, is not a reliable 
one). Even this not being considered a large 
enough force to effect the project, 100 talents of 
silver were sent to engage mercenary troops for the 
expedition from Israel. When these came, a man of 
God strongly dissuaded the king from relying on 
them (2 Ch 25 7ff). When this was communicated 
to the soldiers, and they were sent back unemployed, 
it roused them to "fierce anger" (ver 10). 

Amaziah's purpose in making these extensive 
preparations for war, in a time of profound peace, 

is clear. To the S.E. of Judah lay 

2. Its the Edomite state, with its capital 
Occasion at Petra. For many years Edom had 

been subject to Jehoshaphat, and a 
Heb "deputy" had governed it (1 K 22 47). In 
the reign of his son and successor, Jehoram, a con- 
federacy of Philistines, Arabians and Edomites took 
Libnah and made a raid on Jerusalem. A band of 
these penetrated the palace, which they plundered, 
abducted some women, and murdered all the young 
princes but the youngest (2 Ch 21 17; 22 1). The 
pubhc commotion and distress caused by such an 
event may be seen reflected in the short oracle of 
the prophet Obadiah, uttered against Edom, if, with 
some, Obadiah's date is put thus early. 

From that time "Edom .... made a king over 
themselves" (2 Ch 21 8), and for fifty years fol- 
lowing were practically independent. 

3. The Vic- It was this blot on Jerusalem and the 
tory in the good name of Judah that Amaziah 
Valley of determined to wipe out. The army 
Salt of retaliation went forward, and after 

a battle in the Valley of Salt, south of 
the Dead Sea, in which they were the victors, moved 
on to Petra. This city lies in a hollow, shut in by 
mountains, and approached only by a narrow ravine, 
through which a stream of water flows. Amaziah 
took it "by storm" (such is Ewald's rendering of 
"by war," in 2 K 14 7). Great execution was 
done, many of the captives being thrown from the 
rock, the face of which is now covered with rock- 
cut tombs of the Gr-Rom age. 

The campaign was thus entirely successful, but 

had evil results. Flushed with victory, Amaziah 

brought back the gods of Edom, and 

4. Apostasy paid them worship. For this act of 
and Its apostasy, he was warned of approach- 
Punishment ing destruction (2 Ch 25 14-17). 

Disquieting news soon came relating 
to the conduct of the troops sent back to Samaria. 
From Beth-horon in the south to the border of the 
northern state they had looted the villages and 
killed some of the country people who had attempted 
to defend their property (2 Ch 25 13). To Ama- 
ziah's demand for reparation, Jehoash's answer was 
the contemptuous one of the well-known parable of 
the Thistle and the Cedar. 

War was now inevitable. The kings "looked 
one another in the face," in the valley of Beth- 

shemesh, where there is a level space, 

5. Battle suitable to the movements of infantry. 
of Beth- Judah was utterly routed, and the 
shemesh king himself taken prisoner. There 

being no treasures in the lately de- 
spoiled capital, Jehoash contented himself with 
taking hostages for future good behavior, and with 
breaking down 400 cubits of the wall of Jerus at the 
N.W. corner of the defence (2 K 14 13.14; 2 Ch 
25 22-24). 




Amaziah's career as a soldier was now closed. 
He outlived Jehoash of Israel "fifteen years" 
(2 K 14 17). His later years were 
6. Closing spent in seclusion and dread, and had 
Years and a tragical ending. The reason for his 
Tragical unpopularity is not far to seek. The 
End responsibility for the war with Je- 

hoash is by the inspired writer placed 
upon the shoulders of Amaziah (2 K 14 9-11). 
It was he who "would not hear." The quarrel 
between the kings was one which it was not beyond 
the power of diplomacy to remedy, but no brotherly 
attempt to heal the breach was made by either Idng. 
When the results of the war appeared, it could not 
be but that the author of the war should be called 
upon to answer for them. So deep was his dis- 
grace and so profound the sense of national humil- 
iation, that a party in the state determined on 
Amaziah's removal, so soon as there was another 
to takehis place. The age of majority among the 
Heb kings was 16, and when Amaziah's son was of 
this age, the conspiracy against his hfe grew so 
strong and open that he fled to Lachish. Here he 
was followed and killed; his body being insultingly 
carried to Jerusalem on horses, and not conveyed 
in a htter or coffin (2 K 14 19.20; 2 Ch 25 27.28). 
He was 54 years old and had reigned for 29 years. 
The Chronicler (2 Ch 26 1) hardly conceals the 
popular rejoicings at the exchange of sovereigns, 
when Uzziah became king. 

In the last ver of 2 Ch 25 is a copyist's error 
by which we read "in the city of Judah," instead 
of "in the city of David," as in the corresponding 
passage in Kings. The singular postscript to the 
record of Amaziah in 2 K 14 22 is intended to 
mark the fact that while the port of Elath on the 
Red Sea fell before the arms, in turn, of Amaziah 
and of his son Uzziah, it was the latter who restored 
it to Judah, as a part of its territory. Amaziah 
is mentioned in the royal genealogy of 1 Ch 3 12, 
but not in that of Mt 1. There is a leap here from 
Jehoram to Uzziah, Ahaziah, Jehoash and Amaziah 
being omitted. W. Shaw Caldecott 

AMBASSADOR, am-bas'a-dor (^'''p'Q, mal'akh, 
"messenger"; T'lb, lug, "mterpreter"; Ti?, fir, "to 
go"; hence a messenger; irpar^va, presbeuo, "to 
act as an ambassador,'' Ut. to be older): An am- 
bassador is an official representative of a king 
or government, as of Pharaoh (Isa 30 4); of the 
princes of Babylon (2 Ch 32 31); of Neco, king 
of Egypt (2 Ch 35 21); of the messengers of 
peace sent by Hezekiah, king of Judah, to Sen- 
nacherib, king of Assyria (Isa 33 7). The same 
Heb term is used of the messengers sent by Jacob to 
Esau (Gen 32 3); by Moses to the king of Edom 
(Nu 20 14). For abundant illustration consult 
"Messenger" {1\1/i'^'0 , mal'akh) in any concordance. 
See Concordance. The inhabitants of Gibeon 
made themselves pretended ambassadors to Joshua 
in order to secure by deceit the protection of a treaty 
("covenant") (Josh 9 4). 

In the NT the term is used m a fig. sense. As 
the imprisoned representative of Christ at Rome 
Paul calls himself "an ambassador in chams 
(Eph 6 20); and in 2 Cor 5 20 includes, with 
himself, all ministers of the gospel, as "ambassadors 
. on behalf of Christ," commissioned by Him, 
as then- sovereign Lord, with the ministry of recon- 
ciling the world to God. The Bible contains no 
finer characterization of the exalted and spmtual 
nature of the minister's vocation as the represen- 
tative of Jesus Christ, the King of kings, and 
Saviour of the world. Dwiqht M. Pratt 

AMBASSAGE, am'ba-saj (irpeo-peto, presheia, "an 
embassy," a body of ambassadors on the message 

entrusted to them): Twice used by Christ (1) in 
the parable of the Pounds, of the citizens who hated 
the nobleman and sent an ambassage, refusing 
to have him reign over them, thus illustrating those 
who wilfully rejected His own spiritual sovereignty 
and kingdom (Lk 19 14); (2) of a weak king who 
sends to a stronger an ambassage to ask conditions 
of peace (Lk 14 32). Not used elsewhere in the 

AMBER, am'ber. See Stones, PreciotTs. 

AMBITIOUS, am-bish'us (4>iXoTi||iai, philo- 
lim&omai, "to be strongly desirous," "strive ear- 
nestly," "make it one's aim"): Given as a marginal 
reading in Rom 15 20 ("being ambitious to bring 
good tidings"), 2 Cor 5 9 ("We are ambitious, 
whether at home or absent, to be well-pleasing 
unto him"), and 1 Thess 4 11 ("that ye be am- 
bitious to be quiet"). 

AMBUSH, am'boosh (^nS, 'arabh, "to set an 
ambush"; D'IS'Q, ma'&rdhh, "an ambush"): A 
military stratagem in which a body of men are placed 
in concealment to surprise an enemy unawares, or to 
attack a point when temporarily undefended. This 
stratagem was employed successfully by Joshua at 
Ai (Josh 8). Jeremiah calls upon the Medes to "set 
up a standard against the walls of Babylon, make 
the watch strong, set the watchmen, prepare the 
ambushes" (Jer 51 12). 

AMBUSHMENT, am'boosh-ment (as above) has 
now disappeared 'in 2 Ch 20 22, where RV gives 
for "ambushment" "liers-in-wait." It still remains 
in 2 Ch 13 13 where both AV and RV render the 
Hebrew noun "ambushment." 

AMEN, a^men' (in ritual speech and in singing 
a-men', a'men) {yiSA ,'amen; a|i<jv,amg?i, = "truly," 
"verily"): Is derived from the reflexive form of a 
vb. meaning "to be firm," or "to prop." It occurs 
twice as a noun in Isa 65 16, where we have 
(AV, RV) "God of truth." This rendering impUes 
the pointing 'omen or 'emun i.e. "truth," or "faith- 
fulness," a reading actually suggested by Cheyne 
and adopted by others. Amen is generally used as 
an advb. of assent or confirmation — fiat, "so let it 
be." In Jer 28 6 the prophet indorses with it 
the words of Hananiah. Amen is employed when 
an individual or the whole nation confirms a cove- 
nant or oath recited in their presence (Nu 5 22; 
Dt 27 15 ff ; Neh 5 13, etc). It also occurs at the 
close of a ps or book of pss, or of a prayer. 

That Amen was appended to the doxology in the 
early church is evident both from St. Paul and Rev, 
and here again it took the form of a response by the 
hearers. The ritual of the installation of the Lamb 
(Rev 5 6-14) concludes with the Amen of the four 
beasts, and the four and twenty elders. It is also 
spoken after "Yea: I come quickly" (22 20). And 
that Rev reflects the practice of the church on earth, 
and not merely of an ideal, ascended community 
in heaven, may be concluded from 1 Cor 14 16, 
whence we gather that the lay brethren were ex- 
pected to say Amen to the address. (See Weiz- 
sacker's The Apostolic Age of the Christian Church, 
Eng. tr, II, 289.) Jambs Millar 

AMERCE, a-mftrs': Found in AV only in Dt 
22 19, "And they shall amerce him in an hundred 
shekels of silver." Amerce is a legal term derived 
from the French (A = "at"; merci = "mercy," i.e. lit. 
"at the mercy" [of the court]). Here it is used of 
the imposing of afine, according to the Law of Moses, 
upon the man who has been proven by the Elders 
to have brought a false charge against the virginity 
of the maid he has married by saying to the father, 
"I found not thy daughter a maid." 

American RV 




rS-vizd' vtir'shun: On July 7, 1870, it was moved 

in the Lower House of the Convooa- 

1. History tion of Canterbury that in the work 

of revision the cooperation of Ameri- 
can divines be invited. This resolution was assented 
to, and on December 7, 1871, the arrangements 
were completed. Under the general presidency 
of Dr. Philip Schaff, an OT Company of fifteen 
scholars was formed, with Dr. W. H. Green as 
chairman, and a NT Company of sixteen members 
(including Dr. Schaff), with Dr. T. D. Woolsey as 
chairman. Work was begun on October 4, 1872, 
and took the form of offering criticisms on the suc- 
cessive portions of the English revision as they were 
received. These criticisms of the American Com- 
panies were duly considered by the Englisli Com- 
panies during the second revision and the decisions 
were again sent to America for criticism. The 
replies received were once more given consideration 
and, finally, the unadopted readings for which the 
American Companies professed deliberate prefer- 
ence were printed as appendices to the two Testa- 
ments as pubhshed in 1881 and 1885. These lists, 
however, were not regarded by the American 
Companies as satisfactory. In the first place, it 
became evident that the English Companies, on 
account of their instructions and for other reasons, 
were not willing to make changes of a certain class. 
Consequently the American Companies insisted 
on only such readings as seemed to have a real 
chance of being accepted. And, in the second place, 
the English presses hurried the last part of the work 
and were unwilling to allow enough time for ade- 
quate thoroughness in the preparation of the lists. 
But it was hoped that the first published edition of 
the ERV would not be considered definitive and 
that in the future such American proposals as had 
stood the test of public discussion might be incor- 
porated into the text. This hope was disappointed 
— the English Companies disbanded as soon as 
their revision was finished and their work stood 
as final. As a result the American Companies 
resolved to continue their organization. They 
were pledged not to issue or indorse any new revi- 
sion within fourteen years after the publication of 
the ERV, and so it was not until 1900 that the 
ARV NT was published. The whole Bible was 
issued in the following year. 

As the complete editions of the ARV give a full 
list of the changes made, only the more prominent 

need be mentioned here. A few of the. 

2. Differ- readings printed in the' appendices to 
ences from the ERV were abandoned, but many 
ERV new ones were introduced, including 

some that had been adopted while the 
English work was in progress but which had not 
been pressed. (See above.) Still, in general appear- 
ance, the ARV differs but slightly from the Enghsh. 
The most important addition is found in the page- 
headings. Some changes have been made in shorten- 
ing the titles of the NT books. The printing of 
poetical passages in poetical form has been carried 
through more consistently. The paragraphs have 
been altered in some cases and (especially in the OT) 
shortened. The punctuation has been simplified, 
especially by the more frequent use of the semi- 
colon. The removal of obsolete words ("magnifical," 
"neesings," etc) has been effected fairly thoroughly, 
obsolete constructions ("jealous over," etc) have 
been modernized, particularly by the use of "who" 
or "that" (instead of "which") for persons and "its" 
(instead of "his") for things. In the OT "Jehovah" 
has been introduced systematically for the proper 
Heb word, as has "Sheol" ("Hades" in the NT). 
Certain passages too literally rendered in the ERV 
("reins," "by the hand of," etc) are given in modern 

terms. In the NT, the substitution of "Holy 
Spirit" for "Holy Ghost" was completed through- 
out (in the ERV it is made in some twenty places), 
"demons" substituted for "devils," "Teacher" for 
"Master," and "try" for "tempt" when there is no 
direct reference to wrongdoing. And so on. 

It may be questioned whether the differences 

between the two Revisions are great enough to 

counterbalance the annoyance and 

3. Criticism confusion resulting from the existence 

of two standard versions in the same 
language. But, accepting the ARV as an accom- 
plished fact, and acknowledging a few demerits 
that it has or may be thought to have in compari- 
son with the ERV (a bit of pedantry in Ps 148 12 
or renderings of disputed passages such as Ps 24 6), 
these demerits are altogether outweighed by the 
superiorities — with one exception. In the Psalter, 
when used liturgieally, the repetition of the word 
"Jehovah" becomes wearisome and the ERV which 
retains "The Lord" is much preferable. Most to 
be regretted in the ARV is its extreme conservatism 
in the readings of the original texts. In the OT 
the number of marginal variants was actually 
reduced. In the NT, only trivial changes are made 
from the so-called Revisers' Greek Text, although 
this text did not represent the best scholarly opin- 
ion even in 1881, while in 1900 it was almost uni- 
versally abandoned. (Today — in 1914 — ^it is obso- 
lete.) It is very unfortunate that the American 
Revisers did not improve on the example of their 
English brethren and continue their sessions after 
the publication of their version, for it is only by the 
successive revisions of published work that a really 
satisfactory result can be attained. 

No ARV Apoc was attempted, a particularly 
unfortunate fact, as the necessity for the study of 

the Apoc has become imperative and 

4. Apocry- the ERV Apoc is not a particularly good 
pha piece of work. However, copies of the 

ARV can now be obtained with the 
ERV Apoc included. See English Versions. 

Burton Scott Easton 
AMETHYST, am'e-thist. See Stones, Precious. 

AMI, a'ml, a'me ('^'Qii, 'ami): Ancestor of a 
family among "Solomon's servants" in the Return 
(Ezr 2 57); the same as Amon in Neh 7 59. 

AMIABLE, a'mi-a-b'l (T^"!';, y'dhidh, "beloved"): 
Applied to the tabernacle or tent of meeting. 
"How a. ["lovely" RVm] are thy tabernacles" 
(Ps 84 1), the pi. having reference to the subdi- 
visions and appurtenances of the sanctuary (cf 
68 35). The adj. is rendered "amiable" in the 
sense of the French aimable, lovely; but the usage 
of the Heb word requires it to be understood as 
meaning "dear," "beloved." Cf "so amiable a 
prospect" (Sir T. Herbert), "They keep their 
churches so cleanly and amiable" (Howell, 1644). 
"What made the tabernacle of Moses lovely was not 
the outside, which was very mean, but what was 
within" (John Gill). See Tabernacle. 

M. O. Evans 

AMINADAB, a-min'a-dab ('A|iiva8Ap, Amino- 
ddb): AV: Gr form of Amminadab (q.v.). Thus 
RV (Mt 14; Lk 3 33). 

AMISS, a-mis': There are two words tr'' "amiss" 
in the NT, Atottos, dtopos, referring to that which 
is improper or harmful (Lk 23 41; Acts 28 6), 
while KaKus, kahds, _ refers to that which is evil 
in the sense of a disaster, then to that which is 
wicked, morally wrong. This latter is the use of 
it in Jas 4 3. The purpose of the prayer is evil, 
it is therefore amiss and cannot be granted (cf 
2Ch6 37ff). 



American RV 

AMITTAI, a-mit'i CPrp^/dmittay, "iaithinV): 
The father of the prophet Jonah. He was from 
Gath-hepher in Zebulun (2 K 14 25; Jon 1 1). 

AMMAH, am'a (iTHi?, 'ammah, "mother" or 
"beginning") : A hill in the territory of Benjamin 
(2 S 2 24), where Joab and Abishai halted at 
nightfall in their pursuit of Abner and his forces 
after their victory over him in the battle of Gibeon. 
It "Ueth before Giah by the way of the wilderness 
of Gibeon"; but the exact location has not been 
identified. The same Heb word appears as the 
second part of Metheg-ammah in 2 S 8 1 AV, but 
rendered "mother city" in RV, probably however 
not the same place as in 2 S 2 24. 

AMMI, am'i pTfl?, 'amml, "my people"): A 
symbolic name given to Israel by Hosea (2 1; 2 
3 in Heb text), descriptive of Israel in the state of 
restoration, and in contrast to sinful and rejected 
Israel, represented by Hosea's son, who was called 
Lo-ammi, "not my people," when born to the 
prophet (Hos 1 9.10). This restoration to the 
Divine favor is more fully described in Hos 2 21. 
23 in words quoted by Paul (Rom 9 25.26). The 
use of such fig. and descriptive names is frequent 
in the OT; cf Isa 62 4.12. 

AMMIDIOI, a-mid'i-oi (AV Ammidoi, am'i-doi; 
'A|i|iC8ioi, Ammidioi [also with aspirate]; oc- 
curring only in 1 Esd 6 20): One of the families 
returning from the Bab Captivity in the First 
Return, under Zerubbabel, in 537 BC. This name 
is not found in the corresponding lists of the canoni- 
cal books, Ezr 2 and Neh 7. Their identity is 

AMMEEL, am'i-el (bi?iT2y', 'amml'el, "my kins- 
man is God"; 'Ajiei^X, Ameiil]): A name borne by 
four men in the OT. 

(1) One of the twelve spies sent into Canaan by 
Moses; son of GemaUi, of the tribe of Dan (Nu 13 

(2) A Benjamite, the father of Machir, a friend 
of David, living at Lodebar in Gilead (2 S 9 4.5; 
17 27). 

(3) Father of Bathshua (or Bathsheba), one of 
David's wives, who was mother of Solomon (1 Ch 3 
5). In the i| passage, 2 S 11 3, by transposition 
of the two parts of the name, he is called Eham, 
meaning "my God is a kinsman." 

(4) The sixth son of Obed-edom, a Levite, one 
of the doorkeepers of the tabernacle of God in 
David's hfe-time (1 Ch 26 5). Edward Mack 

AMMIHirD, a-ml'hud (TirT'ia?, 'ammihudh, 
"my kinsman is glorious" ■ variously in LXX, 
'EfiiaiS, Emiaiid or SejiiovS, Semioud or 'AjiioiS, 
AmioM) : The name of several OT persons. 

(1) Father of Elishama, who in the Wilderness 
was head of the tribe of Ephraim (Nu 1 10; 2 18; 
7 48.53; 10 22; 1 Ch 7 26). 

(2) Father of Shemuel, who was appointed by 
Moses from the tribe of Simeon to divide the land 
among the tribes after they should have entered 
Canaan (Nu 34 20). 

(3) Father of Pedahel, who was appomted from 
the tribe of Naphtah for the same purpose as the 
Ammihud of (2) (Nu 34 28). 

(4) In the AV and RVm for the Ammihur 
("lirTi^y , '■ammihur, "my kinsman is noble"), who 
was father of Talmai of Geshur, a little Aram, king- 
dom E. of the Lebanon mountains, to whom Absa- 
lom fled after the murder of his brother Amnon. 
The weight of evidence seems to favor the reading 
Ammihur (2 S 13 37). 

(5) A descendant of Judah through the line of 
Perez (1 Ch 9 4). Edwabd Mack 

AMMIHUR, a-mi'hur (AV and RVm; "l^ni'S?, 
'ammihur, "my kinsman is noble": 'E(i.iov8, Emir- 
Olid). See Ammihud (4). 

AMMINADAB, a-min'a-dab (TTi'^IZ? , 'am^ 
minddhabh = "iay people [or my kinsman] is gen- 
erous or noble") : Three persons bearing this name 
are mentioned in the OT. 

(1) In Ruth 4 19.20 and 1 Ch 2 10 Amminadab 
is referred to as one of David's ancestors. He was 
the great-grandson of Perez, a son of Judah (Gen 
38 29; 46 12) and the great-grandfather of Boaz, 
who again was the great-grandfather of David. 
Aaron's wife, Elisheba, was a daughter of Am- 
minadab (Ex 6 23), while one of the sons, viz. 
Nahshon, occupied an important position in the 
Judah-clan (Nu 1 7; 2 3; 7 12; 10 14). 

(2) In the first Book of Ch (6 22) Amminadab is 
mentioned as a son of Kohath (and therefore a 
grandson of Levi) and the father of Korah. But in 
other genealogical passages (Ex 6 18; Nu 3 19; 
1 Ch 6 2) the sons of Kohath are Amram, Izhar, 
Hebron and Uzziel, and in two places (Ex 6 21; 
1 Ch 6 38) Izhar is mentioned as the father of 

(3) According to 1 Ch (15 10.11) Amminadab 
was the name of a priest who took part in the 
removal of the ark to Jerusalem. He was the son 
of Uzziel, and therefore a nephew of Amminadab, 
son of Kohath ( = Izhar) . Thomas Lewis 

AMMINADIB, a-min'a-dib (11-15 IBS', 'amml 
nadhlhh) : The name occurs in AV and RVm only 
in one passage (Cant 6 12, "the chariots of Am- 
minadib"). In AVm and RV text, however, it is 
not regarded as a proper name, and the clause is 
rendered, "among the chariots of my princely 
people." Interpretations widely vary (see Com- 


AMMISHADDAI, am-i-shad'i, am-i-shad-a'I 
(I'lTfii^y, 'ammishadday, "Shaddai is my kins- 
man") : The father of Ahiezer, a Danite captain or 
"head of his fathers' house," during the Wilderness 
journey (Nu 1 12; 2 25, etc). 

AMMIZABAD, a-mizVbad (nnrB?, 'ammi- 
zabhadh, "my kinsman has made a present"): The 
son of Benaiah, one of David's captains for the third 
month (1 Ch 27 6). 

AMMON, am'on; AMMONITES, am'on-its 
Q'i'B'? , 'ammon; Qijl'^?, 'ammonim): The Heb 
tradition makes this tribe descendants of Lot and 
hence related to the Israelites (Gen 19 38). This 
is reflected in the name usually employed in OT to 
designate them, Ben 'Amml, B'ne 'Ammon, "son of 
my people," "children of my people," i.e. relatives. 
Hence we find that the Israelites are commanded 
to avoid conflict with them on their march to the 
Promised Land (Dt 2 19). Their dwelling-place 
was on the east of the Dead Sea and the Jordan, 
between the Arnon and the Jabbok, but, before 
the advance of the Hebrews, they had been dis- 
possessed of a portion of their land by the Amorites, 
who founded, along the east side of the Jordan 
and the Dead Sea, the kingdom of Sihon (Nu 21 
21-31). We know from the records of Egypt, esp. 
Am Tab, the approximate date of the Amorite 
invasion (14th and 13th cents., BC). They were 
pressed on the north by the Hittites who forced 
them upon the tribes of the south, and some of 
them settled east of the Jordan. Thus Israel 
I helped A. by destroying their old enemies, and this 




makes their conduct at a later period the more 
reprehensible. In the days of Jephthah they 
oppressed the Israelites east of the Jordan, claim- 
ing that the latter had deprived them of their terri- 
tory when they came from Egypt, whereas it was 
the possessions of the Amorites they took (Jgs 11 
1-28). They were defeated, but their hostiUty 
did not cease, and their conduct toward the Is- 
raehtes was particularly shameful, as in the days 
of Saul (1 S 11) and of David (2 S 10). This may 
account for the cruel treatment meted out to them 
in the war that followed (2 S 12 26-31). They 
seem to have been completely subdued by David 
and their capital was taken, and we find a better 
spirit manifested afterward, for Nahash of Rabbah 
showed kindness to him when a fugitive (2 S 17 
27-29) . Their country came into the possession of 
Jeroboam, on the division of the kingdom, and 
when the Syrians of Damascus deprived the king- 
dom of Israel of their possessions east of the Jordan, 
the A. became subjects of Benhadad, and we find 
a contingent of 1,000 of them serving as allies of 
that king in the great battle of the Syrians with 
the Assyrians at Qarqar (854 BC) in the reign of 
Shalmaneser II. They may have regained their 
old territory when Tiglath-pileser carried off the 
Israelites E. of the Jordan into captivity (2 K 16 29; 
1 Ch 5 26)'. Their hostility to both kingdoms, 
Judah and Israel, was often manifested. In the 
days of Jehoshaphat they joined with the Moabites 
in an attack upon him, but met with disaster 
(2 Ch 20). They paid tribute to Jotham (2 Ch 
27 5). After submitting to Tiglath-pileser they 
were generally tributary to Assyria, but we have 
mention of their joining in the general uprising 
that took place under Sennacherib; but they sub- 
mitted and we find them tributary in the reign of 
Esarhaddon. Their hostihty to Judah is shown 
in their joining the Chaldaeans to destroy it (2 K 24 
2). Their cruelty is denounced by the prophet 
Amos (1 13), and their destruction by Jer (49 1-6), 
Ezk (21 28-32), Zeph (2 8.9). Their murder of 
Gedahah (2 K 26 22-26; Jer 40 14) was a das- 
tardly act. Tobiah the A. united with Sanballat to 
oppose Neh (Neh 4), and their opposition to the 
Jews did not cease with the establishment of the 
latter in Judaea. 

They joined the S3rrians in their wars with the 
Maccabees and were defeated by Judas (1 Mac 5 

Their religion was a degrading and cruel super- 
stition. Their chief god was Molech, or Moloch, 
to whom they offered human sacrifices (1 K 11 7) 
against which Israel was especially warned (Lev 20 
2-5). This worship was common to other tribes for 
we find it mentioned among the Phoenicians. 


AMMONITESS, am-on-I'tes, a-mon'i-tes 
(IT'SIB?, 'ammonlth) : A woman of the Ammon- 
ites, Naamah, the mother of Rehoboam (1 K 14 
21.31; 2 Ch 12 13; 24 26). 

AMNON, am'non ("iiDpSI, 'amnon, "faithful"; 
cf ^1D'''!?5i! , 'dminon, 2 S 13 20, which is probably a 
diminutive. Wellhausen [IJG, II, 24, n.2] resolves 
^iD"''!??? into "'TS^, 'immi, and ']1D, nun, "my 
mother is the serpent"; cf Nun) : 

(1) The eldest son of David and Ahinoam, the 
Jezreelites (cf 2 S 3 2). As the crown prince and 
heir presumptive to the throne, he was intensely 
hated by Absalom, who was, therefore, doubly 
eager to revenge the outrage committed by Amnon 
upon his sister Tamar (2 S 3 2; 13 1 ff; 1 Ch 

3 1). 

(2) A name in the genealogy of Judah (1 Ch 

4 20). 

AMOK, a'mok (pi^?, 'amoJi;, "deep"): A chief 
priest who came to Jerus with Zerubbabel (Neh 
12 7) and the forefather of Eber, who was priest 
in the days of Joiakim (Neh 12 20). 

AMON, a'mon CjiTOiJ, 'dmon): A name identical 
with that of the Egyp local deity of Thebes (No) ; 
cf Jer 46 25. The foreign name given to a Heb 
prince is remarkable, as is also the fact that it is 
one of the two or three royal names of Judah not 
compounded with the name of Jehovah. See 
Manasseh. It seems to reflect the sentiment 
which his fanatical father sought to make prevail 
that Jeh had no longer any more claim to identi- 
fication with the realm than had other deities. 

(1) A king of Judah, son and successor of Ma- 
nasseh; reigned two years and was assassinated 
in his own palace by the ofiioials of his household. 
The story of his reign is told briefly in 2 K 21 
19-26, and still more briefly, though in identical 
terms, so far as they go, in 2 Ch 33 21-25. His 
short reign was merely incidental in the history of 
Judah; just long enough to reveal the traits and 
tendencies which directly or indirectly led to his 
death. It was merely a weaker continuation of the 
regime of his idolatrous father, though without the 
fanaticism which gave the father positive character, 
and without the touch of piety which, if the Chron- 
icler's account is correct, tempered the father's 
later years. 

If the assassination was the initial act of a revo- 
lution, the latter was immediately suppressed by 
"the people of the land," who put to death the 
conspirators and placed Anion's eight-year-old 
son Josiah on the throne. In the view of the 
present writer the motive of the affair was prob- 
ably connected with the perpetuity of the Dayidic 
dynasty, which, having survived so long according 
to prophetic prediction (cf 2 S 7 16; Ps 89 36.37), 
was an essential guarantee of Jeh's favor. Ma- 
nasseh's foreign sympathies, however, had loosened 
the hold of Jeh on the officials of his court; so that, 
instead of being the loyal center of devotion to 
Israel's religious and national idea, the royal house- 
hold was but a hotbed of worldly ambitions, and 
all the more for Manasseh's prosperous reign, so 
long immune from any stroke of Divine judgment. 
It is natural that, seeing the insignificance of 
Amon's administration, some ambitious clique, 
imitating the pohcy that had frequently succeeded 
in the Northern Kingdom, should strike for the 
throne. They had reckoned, however, without 
estimating the inbred Davidie loyalty of the body 
of the people. It was a blow at one of their most 
cherished tenets, committing the nation both 
politically and religiously to utter uncertainty. 
That this impulsive act of the people was in the 
line pf the purer religious movement which was ripen- 
ing in Israel does not prove that the spiritually- 
minded "remnant" was minded to violence and 
conspiracy; it merely shows what a stern and 
sterling fiber of loyalty still existed, seasoned and 
confirmed by trial, below the corrupting cults and 
fashions of the ruling classes. In the tragedy of 
Amon's reign, in short, we get a ghmpse of the 
basis of sound principle that lay at the common 
heart of Israel. 

(2) A governor of Samaria (1 K 22 26) ; the one 
to whom the prophet Mioaiah was committed as 
a prisoner by King Ahab, after the prophet had 
disputed the predictions of the court prophets and 
foretold the king's death in battle. 

(3) The head of the "children of Solomon's serv- 
ants" (Neh 7 59) who returned from captivity; 
reckoned along with the Nethinim, or temple slaves. 
Called also Ami (Ezr 2 57). 

John Franklin Gbnung 




AMORITES, am'o-nts ; Amorites 0^0^ , 'Smorl, 
always in the singular like the Bab Amurru from 
which it is taken; 'A|jioppatoi, Amorraloi) : 

1. Varying Use of the Name Explained 

2. The Amorlte Kingdom 

3. Sihou's Conquest 

4. Disappearance of the Amorite Kingdom 
5 Physical Characteristics of the Amorites 

The name Amorite is used in the OT to denote 
(1) the inhabitants of Pal generally, (2) the popu- 
lation of the hills as opposed to the plain, and 
(3) a specific people under a king of their own. 
Thus (1) we hear of them on the west shore of the 
Dead Sea (Gen 14 7), at Hebron (Gen 14 13), 
and Shechem (Gen 48 22), in Gilead and Bashan 
(Dt 3 10) and under Hermon (Dt 3 8; 4 48). 
They are named instead of the Canaanites as the 
inhabitants of Pal whom the Israelites were required 
to exterminate (Gen 15 16; Dt 20 17; Jgs 6 10; 
1 S 7 14; 1 K 21 26; 2 K 21 11); the older 
population of Judah is called Amorite in Josh 10 
5.6, in conformity with which Ezk (16 3) states that 
Jerus had an Amorite father; and the Gibeonites are 
said to have been "of the remnant of the Amorites" 
(2 S 21 2). On the other hand (2), in Nu 13 29 
the Amorites are described as dwelling in the moun- 
tains like the Hittites and Jebusites of Jerus, while 
the Amalekites or Bedouins lived in the south and 
the Canaanites on the seacoast and in the valley 
of the Jordan. Lastly (3) we hear of Sihon, "king 
of the Amorites," who had conquered the northern 
half of Moab (Nu 21 21-31; Dt 2 26-35). 

Assyriological discovery has explained the varying 
use of the name. The Heb form of it is a translit- 
eration of the Bab Amurru, which was 

1. Varying both sing, and pi. In the age of Abra- 
Use of the ham the Amurru were the dominant 
Name Ex- people in western Asia; hence Syria 
plained and Pal were called by the Baby- 
lonians "the land of the Amorites." 

In the Assyr period this was replaced by "land of 
the Hittites," the Hittites in the Mosaic age having 
made themselves masters of Syria and Canaan. 
The use of the name "Amorite" in its general 
sense belongs to the Bab period of oriental history. 
The Amorite kingdom was of great antiquity. 
About 2600 BC it embraced the larger part of 
Mesopotamia and Syria, with its capi- 

2. The tal probably at Harran, and a few 
Amorite centuries later northern Babylonia 
Kingdom was occupied by an "Amorite" dy- 
nasty of kings who traced their descent 

from Samu or Sumu (the Biblical Shem), and made 
Babylon their capital. To this dynasty belonged 
Khammu-rabi, the Amraphel of Gen 14 1. In the 
astrological documents of the period frequent 
reference is made to "the king of the Amorites." 
This king of the Amorites was subject to Baby- 
lonia in the age of the dynasty of Ur, two or three 
centuries before the birth of Abraham. He claimed 
suzerainty over a number of "Amorite" kinglets, 
among whom those of Khana on the Euphrates, 
near the mouth of the Khabur, maybe named, since 
in the Abrahamic age one of them was called 
Khammu-rapikh and another Isarlim or Israel. 
A payment of a cadastral survey made at this time 
by a Bab governor with the Can name of Urime- 
leoh is now in the Louvre. Numerous Amorites 
were settled in Ur and other Bab cities, chiefly for the 
purpose of trade. They seem to have enjoyed the 
same rights and privileges as the native Baby- 
lonians. Some of them were commercial travelers, 
but we hear also of the heads of the great fiurms 
making journeys to the Mediterranean coast. 

In an inscription found near Diarbekir and dedi- 
cated to Khammu-rabi by Ibirum ( = Eber), the 
governor of the district, the only title given to the 

Bab monarch is "king of the Amorites," where in- 
stead of Amurru the Sumerian Martu (Heb moreh) 
is used. The great-grandson of Khammu-rabi still 
calls himself "king of the widespread land of the 
Amorites," but two generations later Babylonia was 
invaded by the Hittites, the Amorite dynasty came 
to an end, and there was once more a "king of the 
Amorites who was not also king of Babylonia. 

Heads of Amorites, akin to North Africans. 

The Amorite kingdom continued to exist down 
to the time of the Israelitish invasion of Pal, and 
mention is made of it in the Egyp records as well 
as in the cuneiform Am Tab, and the Hittite ar- 
chives recently discovered at Boghaz-keui, 'the site 
of the Hittite capital in Cappadocia. The Egyp 
conquest of Canaan by the kings of the XVIIIth 
Dynasty had put an end to the effective govern- 
ment of that country by the Amorite princes, 
but; their rule still extended eastward to the borders 
of Babylonia, while its southern hmits coincided 
approximately with what was afterward the north- 
ern frontier of Naphtali. The Amorite kings, 
however, became, at all events in name, the vassals 
of the Egyp Pharaoh. When the Egyp empire 
began to break up, under the "heretic king" Amen- 
hotep IV, at the end of the XVIIIth Dynasty 
(1400 BC), the Amorite princes naturally turned 
to their more powerful neighbors in the north. One 
of the letters in the Tell el-Amarna correspondence 
is from the Pharaoh to his Amorite vassal Aziru 
the son of Ebed-Asherah, accusing him of rebellion 
and threatening him with punishment. Eventually 
Aziru found it advisable to go over openly to the 
Hittites, and pay the Hittite government an annual 
tritsute of 300 shekels of gold. From that time 
forward the Amorite kingdom was a dependency 
of the Hittite empire, which, on the strength of 
this, claimed dominion over Pal as far as the Egyp 

The second successor of Aziru was Abi-Amurru 
(or Abi-Hadad), whose successor bore, in addition 
to a Sem name, the Mitannian name of Bente- 
sinas. Bente-sinas was dethroned by the Hittite 
King Muttallis and imprisoned in Cappadocia, 
where he seems to have met the Hittite prince 
Khattu-sil, who on the death of his brother Muttal- 
lis seized the crown and restored Bente-sinas to 
his kingdom. Bente-sinas married the daughter 
of Khattu-sil, while his own daughter was wedded 
to the son of his Hittite suzerain, and an agreement 
was made that the succession to the Amorite throne 
should be confined to her descendants. Two or 
three generations later the Hittite empire was 
destroyed by an invasion of "northern barbarians," 
the Phrygians, probably, of Gr history, who marched 
southward, through Pal, against Egypt, carrying 
with them "the king of the Amorites." The in- 
vaders, however, were defeated and practically 
exterminated by Ramses III of the XXth Egyp 
Dynasty (1200 BC). The Amorite king, captured 
on this occasion by the Egyptians, was probably 
the immediate predecessor of the Sihon of the OT. 




Egyp influence in Canaan had finally ceased with 

the invasion of Egypt by the Libyans and peoples 

of the Aegean in the fifth year of 

3. Sihon's Meneptah, the successor of Ramses 
Conquest II, at the time of the Israelitish Exo- 
dus. Though the invaders were re- 
pulsed, the Egyp garrisons had to .be withdrawn 
from the cities of southern Pal, where their place 
was taken by the Philis who thus blocked the way 
from Egypt to the north. The Amorites, in the 
name of their distant Hittite suzerains, were ac- 
cordingly able to overrun the old Egyp provinces 
on the east side of the Jordan; the Ainorite chief- 
tain Og possessed himself of Bashan (Dt 3 8), and 
Sihon, "king of the Amorites," conquered the north- 
ern part of Moab. 

The conquest must have been recent at the time 
of the Israelitish invasion, as the Amorite song of 
triumph is quoted in Nu 21 27-29, and adapted 
to the overthrow of Sihon himself by the Israelites. 
'Woe unto thee,' it- reads, 'O Moab; thou art 
undone, O people of Chemosh! [ChemoshJ hath 
given thy sons who escaped [the battle] and thy 
daughters into captivity to Sihon king of the 
Amorites.' The flame that had thus consumed 
Heshbon, it is further declared, shall spread south- 
ward through Moab, while Heshbon itself is rebuilt 
and made the capital of the conqueror: "Come to 
Heshboh, that the city of Sihon [like the city of 
David, 2 S 5 9] may be rebuilt and restored. For 
the fire has spread from Heshbon, the flame from the 
capital of Sihon, devouring as far as Moab [reading 
'adh with the LXX instead of 'ar], and swallowing 
up [reading bal''dh with the LXX] the high places 
of Arnon." The Israelitish invasion, however, pre- 
vented the expected conquest of southern Moab from 
taking place. 

After the fall of Sihon the Amorite kingdom dis- 
appears. The Sjrrians of Zobah, of Hamath and 
of Damascus take its place, while 

4. Disap- with the rise of Assyria the "Amor- 
pearance of ites" cease to be the representatives 
the Amorite in contemporary lit. of the inhabitants 
Kingdom of western Asia. At one time their 

power had extended to the Bab 
frontier, and Bente-sinas was summoned to Cap- 
padocia by his Hittite overlord to answer a charge 
made by the Bab ambassadors of his having raided 
northern Babylonia. The Amorite king urged, 
however, that the raid was merely an attempt to 
recover a debt of 30 talents of silver. 

In Nu 13 29 the Amorites are described as moun- 
taineers, and in harmony with this, according to 

Professor Petrie's notes^ the Egyp 

5. Physical artists represent them with fair com- 
Characteris- plexions, blue eyes and light hair. It 
tics of the would, therefore, seem that they 
Amorites belonged to the Libyan race of north- 
ern Africa rather than to the Sem 

stock. In western Asia, however, they were mixed 
with other racial elements derived from the sub- 
ject populations, and as they spoke a Sem language 
one of the most important of these elements would 
have been the Semites. In its general sense, more- 
over, the name "Amorite" included in the Bab 
period all the settled and civilized peoples west of 
the Euphrates to whatever race they might belong. 

Literature. — Hugo Winckler, Mitteilungen der deut- 
schen Orient-Gesellschaft (1907), No. 35, Berlin; Sayce, 
The Races of the OT, Kellgious Tract Sec, 1890. 

A. H. Sayce 

AMOS, a'mos (Oiioy , 'amof, "burdensome" or 
"burden-bearer"; 'Afiiis, 4mos) : 

I. The Prophet 

1. Name 

2. Native Place 

3. Personal History 

4. His Preparation 

(1) Knowledge of God 

(2) Acquaintance with History of His People 

(3) Personal Travel 

(4) Scenery of His Home 

5. His Mission 

6. Date 
11. The Book 

1. Its Divisions 

2. Its Outlook 

3. Value of the Book 

(1) As a Pictiire of the Social Condition 

(2) As Picture of the Religious Condition 

(3) Testimony to History 

(4) Testimony to the Law 

(a) The Ritual 

(b) Ethical Teaching 

(5) The Prophetic Order 

(6) The Prophetic Eehgion 


/. The Prophet. — Amos is the prophet whose 

book stands third among the "Twelve" in the 

Hebrew canon. No other person 

1. Name bearing the same name is mentioned 

in the OT, the name of the father of 
the prophet Isaiah being written differently {'amog). 
There is an Amos mentioned in the genealogical 
series Lk 3 25, but he is otherwise unknown, and 
we do not know how his name would have been 
written in Hebrew. Of the signification of the 
prophet's name all that can be said is that a verb 
with the same stem letters, in the sense of to load or 
to carry a load, is not uncommon in the language. 

Tekoa, the native place of Amos, was situated 
at a distance of 5 miles S. from Bethlehem, from 

which it is visible, and 10 miles from 

2. Native Jerusalem, on a hill 2,700 ft. high. 
Place overlooking the wilderness of Judah. 

It was made a "city for defence" by 
Rehoboam (2 Ch 11 6), and may have in fact 
received its name from its remote and exposed 
position; for the stem of which the word is a deriva- 
tive is of frequent occurrence in the sense of sound- 
ing an alarm with the trumpet: e.g. "Blow the 
trumpet in Tekoa, and set up a sign of fire in 
Beth-haccerem" (Jer 6 1 AV). The same word is 
also used to signify the setting up of a tent by 
striking in the tent-pegs; and Jerome states that 
there was no village beyond Tekoa in his time. 
The name has survived, and the neighborhood is 
at the present day the pasture-ground for large 
flocks of sheep and goats. From the high ground 
on which the modern village stands one looks down 
on the bare undulating hills of one of the bleakest 
districts of Palestine, "the waste howling wilder- 
ness," which must have suggested some of the 
startling imagery of the prophet's addresses. The 
place may have had — as is not seldom the case with 
towns or villages — a reputation for a special quality 
of its inhabitants: for it was from Tekoa that 
Joab fetched the wise woman" who by a feigned 
story effected the reconciliation of David with his 
banished son Absalom (2 S 14). There are traces 
in the Book of Am of a shrewdness and mother-wit 
which are not so conspicuous in other prophetical 

The particulars of a personal kind which are 
noted in the book are few but suggestive. Amos 

was not a prophet or the son of a 

3. Personal prophet, he tells us (7 14), i.e. he did 
History not belong to the professional class 

which frequented the so-called schools 
of the prophets. He was "among the herdmen of 
Tekoa' (1 1), the word here used being found 
only once in another place (2 K 3 4) and apphed 
to Mesha, king of Moab. It seems to refer to a 
special breed of sheep, somewhat ungainly in ap- 
pearance but producing an abundant fleece. In 
7 14 the word rendered "herdman" is different, and 
denotes an owner of cattle, though some, from the 
LXX rendering, think that the word should be 
the same as in 1 1. He was also "a dresser of 




sycomore-trees" (7 14). The word rendered "dress- 
er" (RV) or "gatherer" (AV) occurs only here, 
and from the rendering of the LXX (kvI^uv) it 
is conjectured that there is reference to a squeez- 
ing or nipping of the sycamore fig to make it more 
palatable or to accelerate its ripening, though such 
a usage is not known in Pal at the present day. 

Nothing is said as to any special preparation of 
the prophet for his work: "The Lord took me from 

following the flock, and the Lord said 
4. His unto me, Go, prophesy unto my people 

Preparation Israel" (7 15 ERV). In these words 

he puts himself in line with all the 
prophets who, in various modes of expression, 
claim a direct revelation from God. But the men- 
tion of the prophetic call in association with the 
mention of his worldly calling is significant. There 
was no period interposed between the one and the 
other, no cessation of husbandry to prepare for the 
work of prophesying. The husbandman was pre- 
pared for this task, and when God's time came he 
took it up. What was that preparation? Even if 
we suppose that the call was a momentary event, the 
man must have been ready to receive it, equipped 
for its performance. And, looking at the way in 
which he accompUshed it, as exhibited in his book, 
we can see that there was a preparation, both 
internal and external, of a very thorough and effect- 
ive character. 

(1) Knowledge of God. — First of all, he has no 
doubt or uncertainty as to the character of the God 
in whose name he is called to speak. The God of 
Amos is one whose sway is boundless (9 2 ff), whose 
power is infinite (8 9f), not only controlling the 
forces of Nature (4; 6 8f) but guiding the move- 
ments and destinies of nations (6 1 ff. 14; 9 7ff). 
Moreover, He is righteous in all His ways, dealing 
with nations on moral principles (1 3 ff; 2 Iff); 
and, though particularly favorable to Israel, yet 
making that very choice of them as a people a 
ground for visiting them with sterner retribution for 
their sins (3 2) . In common with all the prophets, 
Amos gives no explanation of how he came to know 
God and to form this conception of His character. 
It was not by searching that they found out God. 
It is assumed that God is and that He is such a 
Being; and this knowledge, as it could come only 
from God, is regarded as undisputed and undis- 
putable. The call to speak in God's name may 
have come suddenly, but the prophet's conception 
of the character of the God who called him is no 
new or sudden revelation but a firm and weU- 
established conviction. 

(2) Acquaintance with history of his people.— 
Then his book shows not only that he was well 
acquamted with the history and traditions of his 
nation, which he takes for granted as well known 
to his hearers, but that he had reflected upon these 
things and realized their significance. We infer that 
he had breathed an atmosphere of rehgion, as there 
is nothing to indicate that, in his acquaintance 
with the religious facts of his nation, he differed 
from those among whom he dwelt, although the 
call to go forth and enforce them came to him in a 
special way. . 

(3) Personal travel.— It has been conjectured 
that Amos had acquired by personal travel the 
accurate acquaintance which he shows in his graphic 
delineations of contemporary life and conditions; 
and it may have been the case that, as a wool- 
merchant or flock-master, he had visited the towns 
mentioned and frequented the various markets to 
which 'the people were attracted. 

(4) Scenery of his Aome.— Nor must we overlook 
another factor in his preparation: the scenery in 
which he had his home and the occupations of his 
daily life. The landscape was one to make a 

solemn impression on a reflective mind: the wide- 
spreading desert, the shimmering waters of the 
Dead Sea, the high wall of the distant hills of Moab, 
over all which were thrown the varying light and 
shade. The silent life of the desert, as with such 
scenes ever before him, he tended his flock or 
defended them from the ravages of wild beasts, 
would to one whose thoughts were full of God 
nourish that exalted view of the Divine Majesty 
which we find in his book, and furnish the imagery 
in which his thoughts are set (12; 3 4 f ; 4 13; 
6 8; 9 5f). As he is taken from following the 
flock, he comes before us using the language and 
figures of his daily life (3 12), but there runs through 
all the note of one who has seen God's working in 
all Nature and His presence in every phenomenon. 
Rustic he may be, but there is no rudeness or 
rusticity in his style, which is one of natural and 
impassioned eloquence, ordered and regular as 
coming from a mind which was responsive to the 
orderly working of God in Nature around him. 
There is an aroma of the free air of the desert about 
his words; but the prophet lives in an ampler ether 
and breathes a purer air; all things in Nature and 
on the field of history are seen in a Divine light and 
measured by a Divine standard. 

Thus prepared in the soUtudes of the extreme 

south of Judah, he was called to go and prophesy 

unto the people of Israel, and appears 

5. His at Bethel the capital of the Northern 
Mission Kingdom. It may be that, in the 

prosecution of his worldly calling, he 
had seen and been impressed by the conditions of 
life and religion in those parts. No reason is given 
for his mission to the northern capital, but the 
reason is not far to seek. It is the manner of the 
prophets to appear where they are most needed; 
and the Northern Kingdom about that time had 
come victorious out of war, and had reached its 
culmination of wealth and power, with the attend- 
ant results of luxury and excess, while the Southern 
Kingdom had been enjoying a period of outward 
tranquillity and domestic content. 

The date of the prophet Amos can approximately 
be fixed from the statement in the first ver that his 

activity fell "in the days of Uzziah 

6. Date king of Judah, and in the days of 

Jeroboam the son of Joash king of 
Israel, two years before the earthquake." Both 
these monarchs had long reigns, that of Uzziah 
extending from 779 to 740 BC and that of Jero- 
boam II from 783 to 743 BC. If we look at the 
years when they were concurrently reigning, and 
bear in mind that, toward the end of Uzziah's reign, 
Jotham acted as co-regent, we may safely place 
the date of Amos at about the year 760 BC. In a 
country in which earthquakes are not uncommon 
the one here mentioned must have been of unusual 
severity, for the memory of it was long preserved 
(Zee 14 5). How long he exercised his ministry 
we are not told. In all probability the book is the 
deposit of a series of addresses delivered from time 
to time till his plain speaking drew upon him the 
resentment of the authorities, and he was ordered 
to leave the country (Am 7 lOff). We can only 
conjecture that, some time afterward, he withdrew 
to his native place and put down in writing a con- 
densed record of the discourses he had dehvered. 

//. The Book.— We can distinguish with more 
than ordinary certainty the outhnes of the individual 
addresses, and the arrangement of the book is 
clear and simple. The text, also, has been on the 
whole faithfully preserved; and though in a few 
places critics profess to find the traces of later 
editorial hands, these conclusions rest mainly on 
subjective grounds, and will be estimated differ- 
ently by different minds. 




The book falls naturally into three parts, recog- 
nizable by certain recurring formulas and general 

Uterary features. 
!•_ Its_ (1) The first section, which is clearly 

Divisions recognizable, embraces chs 1 and 2. 
Here, after the title and designation 
of the prophet in ver 1, there is a solemn procla- 
mation of Divine authority for the prophet's words: 
"Jeh will roar from Zion, and utter his voice 
from Jerusalem" (ver 2). This is notable in one 
who throughout the book recognizes God's power 
as world-wide and His operation as extensive as 
creation; and it should be a caution in view, on 
the one hand, of the assertion that the temple at 
Jerusalem was not more sacred than any of the 
numerous "high places" throughout the land, and, 
on the other hand, the superficial manner in which 
some writers speak of the Heb notion of a Deity 
whose dwelling-place was restricted to one locality 
beyond which His influence was not felt. For this 
God, who has His dwelling-place in Zion, now 
through the mouth of the prophet denounces in 
succession the surrounding nations, and this mainly 
not for offences committed against the chosen people 
but for moral offences against one another and for 
breaches of a law binding on humanity. It will 
be observed that the nations denounced are not 
named in geographical order, and the prophet 
exhibits remarkable rhetorical skill in the order of 
selection. The interest and sympathy of the 
hearers is secured by the fixing of the attention on 
the enormities of guilt in their neighbors, and curios- 
ity is kept awake by the uncertainty as to where 
the next stroke of the prophetic whip will fall. 
Beginning with the more distant and alien peoples 
of Damascus, Gaza and Tyre, he wheels round to 
the nearer and kindred peoples of Edom, Ammon 
and Moab, till he rests for a moment on the brother 
tribe of Judah, and thus, having relentlessly drawn 
the net around Israel by the enumeration of seven 
peoples, he swoops down upon the Northern King- 
dom to which his message is to be particularly 

(2) The second section embraces chs 3 to 6, 
and consists apparently of a series of discourses, 
each introduced by the formula: "Hear this 
word" (3 1; 4 1; 5 1), and another introduced 
by a comprehensive: "Woe to them that are at 
ease in Zion, and to them that are secure in the 
mountain of Samaria" (6 1). The divisions here 
are not so clearly marked. It will be observed 
e.g. that there is another "Woe" at 5 18; and in 
ch 4, though the address at the outset is directed 
to the luxurious women of Samaria, from ver 4 
onward the words have a wider reference. Accord- 
ingly some would divide this section into a larger 
number of subsections; and some, indeed, have 
described the whole book as a collection of ill- 
arranged fragments. But, while it is not necessary 
to suppose that the written book is an exact repro- 
duction of the spoken addresses, and while the 
division into chs has no authority, yet we must 
allow for some latitude in the details which an 
impassioned speaker would introduce into his dis- 
courses, and for transitions and connections of 
thought which may not be apparent on the surface. 

(3) The third section has some well-marked char- 
acteristics, although it is even less uniform than the 
preceding. The outstanding feature is the phrase, 
"Thus the Lord Jeh showed me" (7 1.4.7; 8 1) 
varied at 9 1 by the words, "I saw the Lord stand- 
ing beside the altar." We have thus a series of 
"visions" bearing upon, and interpreted as apply- 
ing to, the condition of Israel. It is in the course 
of one of these, when the prophet comes to the 
words, "I will rise against the house of Jeroboam 
with the sword" (7 9) that the interposition of 

Amaziah, the priest of Bethel, is recorded, with the 
prophet's noble reply as to his Divine call, and his 
rebuke and denunciation of the priest, ending with 
a prophetic announcement of the downfall and 
captivity of Israel (7 14^17). 

If the discourses are put down in chronological 

order of their delivery, it would appear that Amos 

did not immediately take his departure, 

2. Its since more visions follow this episode; 
Outlook and there is a special appropriateness 

in the intervention of Amaziah just 
at the point where it is recorded. As to the closing 
passage of this section (9 11-15) which gives a 
bright prospect of the future, there is a class of 
critics who are inclined to reject it just on this 
account as inconsistent with the severe denunciatory 
tone of the rest of the book. It is quite possible, 
however, that the prophet himself (and no succeed- 
ing later editor) may have added the passage when 
he came to write down his addresses. There, is no 
reason to believe that any of the prophets — ^harsh 
though their words were — believed that the God 
of Israel would make a full end of His people in 
captivity: on the contrary, their assurance of 
God's faithfulness to His promise, and the deep- 
seated conviction that right would ultimately pre- 
vail, lead us to expect even in the sternest or earliest 
of the prophets the hope of a future glory — that 
hope which grew brighter and brighter as the na- 
tion's outlook grew darker, and attained intensity 
and clearness in the Messianic hope which sus- 
tained them in the darkest days of exile. It is 
difficult to believe that any of the prophets were 
prophets of despair, or to conceive how they could 
have prophesied at all unless they had a firm faith 
in the ultimate triumph of the good. 

The Book of Am is particularly valuable from 
the fact that he is certainly one of the earliest 

prophets whose writings have come 

3. Value down to us. It is, like the Book of 
of the Book Hosea which belongs to about the 

same time, a contemporaneous docu- 
ment of a period of great significance in the history 
of Israel; and not only gives graphic sketches or 
illuminating hints of the life and religious condition 
of the people, but furnishes a trustworthy standard 
for estimating the value of some other books whose 
dates are not so precisely determined, a definite 
starting-point for tracing the course of Israel's 

(1) As a picture of the social condition. — The book 
is valuable as embodying a contemporary picture 
of society and the condition of religion. From the 
abuses which the prophet denounces and the life- 
hke sketches he draws of the scenes amid which he 
moved, taken along with what we know otherwise 
of the historical movements of the period, we are 
able to form a fairly adequate estimate of the con- 
dition of the age and the country. During the 
reign of Jeroboam II the kingdom of Israel, after 
having been greatly reduced during preceding 
reigns, rose to a degree of extent and influence 
imexampled since the days of Solomon (2 K 14 25) ; 
and we are not astonished to read in the Book of Am 
the haughty words which he puts into the mouth 
of the people of his time when they spoke of Israel 
as the "chief of the nations," a first-class power in 
modern language, and boasted of the "horns" by 
which they had attained that eminence (6 1.13). 
But success in war, if it encouraged this boastful 
spirit, brought also inevitable evils in its train. 
Victory, as we know from the Assyr monuments, 
meant plunder; for king after king recounts how 
much spoil he had taken, how many prisoners he had 
carried away; and we must assume that wars 
among smaller states would be conducted on the 
same methods. In such wars, success meant an 




extension of territory and increase of wealth, while 
defeat entailed the reverse. But it is to be remem- 
bered that, in an agricultural country and in a 
society constituted as that of Israel was, the result 
of war to one class of the population was to a great 
extent disastrous, whatever was the issue, and 
success, when it was achieved, brought evils in its 
train which even aggravated their condition. The 
peasant, required to take up arms for ofifence or 
defence, was taken away from the labors of the 
field which, in the best event, were for a time neg- 
lected, and, in the worst, were wasted and rendered 
unproductive. And then, when victory was se- 
cured, the spoils were liable to fall into the hands 
of the nobles and leaders, those "called with a 
name" (6 1), while the peasant returned to his 
wasted or neglected fields without much substantial 
resource with which to begin life again. The wealth 
secured by the men of strong hand led to the in- 
crease of luxury in its possessors, and became 
actually the means of still further adding to the 
embarrassment of the poor, who were dependent 
on the rich for the means of earning their livelihood. 
The situation would be aggravated under a feeble 
or corrupt government, such as was certainly that 
of Jeroboam's successors. The condition prevails 
in modern eastern countries, even under com- 
paratively wise and just administration; and that 
it was the state of matters prevaiUng in the time of 
Amos is abundantly clear from his book. The 
opening denunciation of Israel for oppression of the 
poor and for earth-hunger (2 6.7) is reechoed and 
amplified in the succeeding chs (3 9.10; 4 1; 5 
11.12; 8 4-6); and the luxury of the rich, who 
battened on the misfortune of their poorer brethren, 
is castigated in biting irony in such passages as 
6 3-6. Specially noticeable in this connection 
is the contemptuous reference to the luxurious 
women, the "kine of Bashan" (4 1), whose ex- 
travagances are maintained by the oppression of 
the poor. The situation, in short, was one that 
has found striking parallels in modern despotic 
countries in the East, where the people are divided 
into two classes, the powerful rich, rich because 
powerful and powerful because rich, and the poor 
oppressed, men who have no helper, no "back" in 
the common eastern phrase, dependent on the rich 
and influential and tending to greater poverty under 
greedy patrons. 

(2) As a picture of the religious condition. — In 
such a social atmosphere, which poisoned the ele- 
mentary virtues, reUgion of a vital kind could 
not flourish; and there are plain indications in the 
words of Amos of the low condition to which it had 
sunk. There was, indeed, as we gather from his 
addresses, no lack of outward attention to the forms 
of worship; but these forms were of so corrupted 
a character and associated with so much practical 
godlessness and even immorality, that instead of 
raising the national character it tended to its greater 
degradation. The people prided themselves in 
what they regarded the worship of the national 
God, thinking that so long as they honored Him 
with costly offerings and a gorgeous ritual, they 
were pleasing Him and secure in His protection. 
Bethel, Dan, Gilgal, Beersheba, and we know not 
how many other places were resorted to in pil- 
grimage by crowds of worshippers. With all the 
accompaniments of ceremonious ritual which the 
newly found wealth put in their power, with offer- 
ings more than the legally prescribed or customary 
(4 4.5) the service of these sanctuaries was main- 
tained; but even these offerings were made at the 
expense of the poor (5 11), the prevailing luxury 
forced its way even to the precincts of the altars 
(2 8), and justice and mercy were conspicuously 
absent from the religious life. The people seemed 

to have settled down to a complacent optimism, 
nourished no doubt by national prosperity, and, 
though there had not been wanting reminders of 
the sovereignty of a righteous God, in convulsions 
of Nature — drought, famine, pestilence and earth- 
quake (4 6-11) — these had been of no avail to 
awaken the sleeping conscience. They put the 
evil day far from them (6 3), for Jeh was their 
national God and "the day of the Lord," the good 
time coming (5 18), when God would come to their 
help, was more in their mind than the imperative 
duty of returning to Him (4 6.8, etc). 

(3) Testimony to history. — ^The book is valuable 
for the confirmation it gives of the historical state- 
ments of other books, particularly for the refer- 
ences it contains to the earlier history contained 
in the Pentateuch. And here we must distinguish 
between references to, or quotations from, books, 
and statements or hints or indications of historical 
events which may or may not have been written 
in books or accessible to the prophet and his hear- 
ers. Opinions differ as to the date of composition 
of the books which record the earUer history, and 
the oldest Biblical writers are not in the habit of 
saying from what sources they drew their informa- 
tion or whether they are quoting from books. We 
can hardly believe that in the time of Amos copies 
of existing books or writings would be in the hands 
of the mass of the people, even if the power to 
read them was general. In such circumstances, if 
we find a prophet like Amos in the compass of a 
small book referring to outstanding events and 
stages of the past history as matters known to all 
his hearers and unquestionable, our confidence in 
the veracity of the books in which these facts are 
recorded is greatly increased, and it becomes a 
matter of comparatively less importance at what 
date these books were composed. Now it is re- 
markable how many allusions, more or less precise, 
to antecedent history are found in the compass of 
this small book; and the significance of them lies 
not in the actual number of references, but in the 
kind of reference and the impfications involved in 
the individual references. That is to say, each 
reference is not to be taken as an isolated testimony 
to some single event in question, but involves a 
great deal more than is expressed, and is intelUgible 
only when other facts or incidents are taken into 
consideration. Thus e.g. the reference to the over- 
throw of Sodom and Gomorrah (4 11) is only 
intelUgible on the supposition that the story of that 
catastrophe was a matter of common knowledge; 
and it would be a carping criticism to argue that 
the destruction of other cities of the plain at the 
same time and the whole story of Lot were imknown 
in the days of Amos because they are not men- 
tioned here in detail. So, when we have in one 
passage a reference to the house of Isaac (7 16), 
in another to the house of Jacob (3 13), in another 
to the house of Joseph (6 6) and in another to the 
enmity between Jacob and Esau (1 11), we cannot 
take these as detached notices, but must supply 
the links which the prophet's words would suggest 
to his hearers. In other words, such slight notices, 
just because they are incidental and brief, imply a 
famiUarity with a (ionnected patriarchal history 
such as is found in the Book of Gen. Again, the 
prophet's references to the "whole family" of the 
"children of Israel" whom the Lord "brought up 
out of the land of Egypt" (3 1), to the Divine 
leading of the people "forty years in the wilderness, 
to possess the land of the Amorite" (2 10) are not 
odds and ends of popular story but links in a chain 
of national history. It seems to be on the strength 
of these and similar references in the books of Am 
and Hos, whose dates are known, that critics have 
agreed to fix the date of the earliest historical por- 




tions of the Pent as, they understand them, viz. 
the parts designated as J and E, in the 8th and 9th 
cents. BC, i.e. at or shortly before the time of these 
prophets. It may be left to the unbiased judgment 
of the reader to say whether the references look 
like references to a newly composed document, or 
whether it is not more probable that, in an age 
when written documents were necessarily few and 
not accessible to the multitude, these references are 
appeals to things well fixed in the national memory, 
a memory extending back to the things themselves. 
Or, if the prophet's words are to be taken as suffi- 
cient proof of the existence of written sources, the fact 
that the matters are assumed as well known would 
rather encourage the conclusion that the written 
sources in question go back to a much earlier period, 
since the matters contained in them had by this 
time become matters of universal knowledge. 

(4) Testimony to the Law. — And what about 
those other elements of the Pent of a legal and ritual 
character which bulk so prominently in those books? 
The question whether the Book of Am indicates an 
acquaintance with these or not is important 
because it is to a great extent on the silence of 
prophetical and historical writers that critics of a 
certain school relegate these legalistic portions of 
the Pent to a late date. Now at the outset it is 
obvious to ask what we have a reasonable right to 
expect. We have to bear in mind what was the 
condition of the people whom Amos addressed, 
and the purpose and aim of his mission to the 
Northern Kingdom. It is to be remembered 
that, as we are told in the Book of K (1 K 12 
25 ff), Jeroboam I deliberately sought to make a 
breach between the worship of Jerusalem and that 
of his own kingdom, while persuading his people 
that the worship of Jeh was being maintained. The 
schism occurred some 170 years before the time of 
Amos and it is not probable that the worship and 
ritual of the Northern Kingdom tended in that 
interval to greater piirity or greater conformity 
to what had been the authoritative practice of the 
undivided kingdom at the temple of Jerus. When, 
therefore, Amos, in face of the corrupt worship 
combined with elaborate ritual which prevailed 
around him, declares that God hates and despises 
their feasts and takes no delight in their solemn 
assemblies (5 21), we are not justified in pressing 
his words, as is sometimes done, into a sweeping 
condemnation of all ritual. On the contrary, 
seeing that, in the very same connection (5 22), 
he specifies burnt offerings and meal offerings and 
peace offerings, and, in another passage (4 4.5), 
daily sacrifices and tithes, sacrifices of thanksgiving 
and free-will offerings, it is natural to infer that 
by these terms which are famihar in the Pent he 
is referring to those statutory observances which 
were part of the national worship of united Israel, 
but had been overlaid with corruption and become 
destitute of spiritual value as practised in the 
Northern Kingdom. So we may take his allu- 
sions to the new moon and the Sabbath (8 5) as 
seasons of special sacredness and universally sanc- 
tioned. Having condemned in such scornful and 
sweeping terms the worship that he saw going on 
around him, what was Amos to gain by entering into 
minute ritual prescriptions or defining the precise 
duties and perquisites of priests and Levites; and 
having condemned the pilgrimages to the shrines 
of Bethel, Gilgal, Beersheba, Samaria and Dan 
(4 4; 5 5; 8 14), what was he to gain by quoting 
the law of Deut as to a central sanctiiary? And 
had one of his. hearers, like the woman of Samaria 
of a later day, attempted to draw him into a dis- 
cussion of the relative merits of the two temples, 
we can conceive him answering in the spirit of 
the great Teacher: "Ye worship ye know not what: 

we know what we worship" (Jn 4 22 AV). A regu- 
lation of the form was of no avail while the whole 
spirit of the observance was corrupt; the soul of 
religion was dead, and the prophet had a higher 
duty than to dress out the carcase. 

At the root of the corruption of the religion lay 
a rottenness of moral sense; and from beginning to 
end Amos insists on the necessity of a pure and 
righteous life. In this connection his appeals are 
in striking agreement with the specially ethical 
demands of the law books, and in phraseology so 
much resemble them as to warrant the conclusion 
that the requirements of the law on these subjects 
were known and acknowledged. Thus his denun- 
ciations of those who oppress the poor (2 7; 4 1; 
8 4) are quite in the spirit and style of Ex 22 21.22; 
23 9; his references to the perversion of justice 
and taking bribes (2 6; 6 7.10 ff; 6 12) are rhetor- 
ical enforcements of the prohibitions of the law 
in Ex 23 6-8; when he reproves those that "lay 
themselves down beside every altar upon clothes 
taken in pledge" (2 8) we hear an echo of the 
command: "If thou at all take th^ neighbor's 
garment to pledge, thou shalt restore it unto him 
before the sun goeth down" (Ex 22 26); and 
when he denounces those making "the ephah small, 
and the shekel great, and dealing falsely with bal- 
ances of deceit" (8 5) his words are in close agree- 
ment with the law, "Ye shaU do no unrighteousness 
in judgment, in mete-yard, in weights, or in measure. 
Just balances,^ just weight, a just ephah, and a just 
hin, shall ye have" (Lev 19 35.36 AV). 

Ethical teaching. As a preacher of righteous- 
ness, Amos affirms and insists upon those ethical 
parts of the law which are its vital elements, and 
which he at the foundation of all prophecy; and 
it is remarkable how even in phraseology he agrees 
with the most ethical book of the Pent, Dt. He 
does not, indeed, like his contemporary Hosea, dwell 
on the love of God as Dt does; but, of sterner 
mould, in almost the very words of Dt, emphasizes 
the keeping of God's commandments, and denounces 
those who despise the law (cf 2 4 with Dt 17 19). 
Among verbal coincidences have been noticed the 
combinations "oppress" and "crush" (4 1; Dt 28 
33), "blasting" and "mildew" (4 9; Dt 28 22), and 
"gall" and "wormwood" (6 12; ■ Dt 29 18). Cf 
also 9 8 with Dt 6 15, and note the predilection 
for the same word to "destroy" common to both 
books (cf 2 9 with Dt 2 22) , In view of all of which 
it seems an extraordinary statement to make that 
"the silence of Amos with reference to the cen- 
tralization of worship, on which Dt is so explicit, 
alone seems sufficient to outweigh any linguistic 
similarity that can be discovered" (H. G. Mitchell, 
Amos, an Essay in Exegesis, 185). 

(5) The prophetic order. — -As Amos is without 
doubt one of the earliest writing prophets, his 
book is invaluable as an example of what prophecy 
was in ancient Israel. And one thing cannot fail 
to impress the reader at the very outset: viz. that 
he makes no claim to be the first or among the first 
of the line, or that he is exercising some new and 
hitherto unheard-of function. He begins by boldly 
speaking in God's name, assuming that even the 
people of the Northern Kingdom were familiar 
with that kind of address. Nay, he goes farther 
and states in unequivocal terms that "the Lord 
God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto 
his servants the prophets" (3 7 AV). We need not 
search farther for a definition of the prophet as 
understood by him and other OT writers: the 
prophet is one to whom God reveals His will, and 
who comes forward to declare that will and pur- 
pose to man. A great deal has been made of the 
words of Amaziah the priest of Bethel ("7 12), as 
if they proved that the prophet in those times was 




regarded as a wandering rhetorician, earning his 
bread by reciting his speeches; and it has been 
inferred from the words of Amos himself that the 
prophets of his day were so disreputable a class 
that he disdained to be named along with them 
(7 14). But all this is fanciful. Even if we admit 
that there were men calling themselves prophets 
who prophesied for hire (Mic 3 5.11), it cannot be 
assumed that the expression here to "eat bread" 
has that meaning; for in other passages it seems 
simply to signify to lead a quiet or ordinary hfe, 
to go about one's daily business (see Ex 24 11; 
Jer 22 15). In any case we are not to take the 
estimate of a man Uke Amaziah or a godless popu- 
lace in preference to the conception of Amos himself 
and his account of his call. It was not by man or 
by any college of prophets but by Jeh Himself 
that he was appointed, and by whatever name he 
might be called, the summons was "Go, prophesy 
unto my people Israel" (7 15). There is no trace 
here of the "prophets becoming conscious of a dis- 
tinction between themselves and the professional 
whhl'lm,, who were apt simply to echo the patriotic 
and nationahstic sentiments of the people, and in 
reality differed but little from the soothsayers and 
diviners of Sem heathenism" (Ottley, The Religion 
of Israel, 90). Whoever the "professional n^hhi'lm" 
may have been in his day, or whatever he thought 
of them if they existed, Amos tells us nothing; but 
he ranges himself with men to whom Jeh has 
spoken in truth (3 7.8), and indicates that there 
had been a succession of such men (2 11), faithful 
amid the prevailing corruption though tempted to 
be unfaithful (2 12) ; in short he gives us to under- 
stand that the "prophetic order" goes back to a 
period long before his day and has its roots in the 
true and original religion of Israel. 

(6) The prophetic religion. — Finally, from the 
Book of Am we may learn what the prophetic 
religion was. Here again there is no indication 
of rudimentary cnideness of conception, or of pain- 
ful struggling upward from the plane of naturalism 
or behef in a merely tribal God. The God in whose 
name Amos speaks has control over all the forces 
of Nature (4 6 ff; 5 8.9), rules the destinies of 
nations (6 2.14; 9 2-6), searches the thoughts of 
the heart (4 13), is inflexible in righteousness and 
deals with nations and with men on equal justice 
(1 and 2; 9 7), and is most severe to the people 
who have received the highest privileges (3 2). 
And this is the God by whose name his hearers call 
themselves, whose claims they cannot deny, whose 
deaUngs with them from old time are well known 
and acknowledged (2 11), whose laws they have 
broken (2 4; 3 10) and for whose just judgment 
they are warned to prepare (4 12). All this the 
prophet enforces faithfully and sternly; not a voice 
is raised in the circle of his hearers to controvert 
his words; all that Amaziah the priest can do is to 
urge the prophet to abstain from unwelcome words 
in Bethel, because it is the king's sanctuary and a 
royal house; the only inference is that the people 
felt the truth and justice of the prophet's words. 
The "prophetic rehgion" does not begin with Amos. 

LiTEKATuRE. — W. R. Harper, "Amos and Hosea," 
in the ICC; S. R. Driver, "Joel and Amos i^. Cam- 
bridge Bible for Schools and Colleges: H. G. MltcheU, 
Amos, an Essay in Exegesis (Boston)^ K. B. DaTadson, 
two arts, in Expos, 3d ser, V, VI .(1887) ; W. R. Snuth, 
The Prophets of Israel; G. A. Smith, " The Book of the 
Twelve Prophets," in Expositors Bible; J.J. y. vaie- 
ton, Amos und Hosea (1894); O. von Orelh, Die zwblf 
kleinen Propheten, 3. Aufl. (1908) and ET; Nowack Die 
kleinenPropheten," in Hand-Commentar zum AI ; Marti, 
"Das Dodekapropheton erklart," in Kurzer Hand-Com- 
mentar zum A T. j^g Robertson 

AMOS, a'mos ('AinSs, Amos): An ancestor of 
Jesus in Lk's genealogy, the eighth before Joseph, 
the husband of Mary (Lk 3 25). 

AMOZ, a'moz (flaS, 'amog, "strong"): The 
father of Isa the prophet (2 K 19 2.20; 20 1; 
2 Ch 26 22; 32 20.32; Isa 1 1; 2 1; 13 1; 20 2; 
37 2.21; 38 1). 

AMPHIPOLIS, am-fip'o-lis ('An<j.CiroXis, Am- 
phipolis): A town in Macedonia, situated on the 
eastern bank of the Strymon (mod. Struma or 
Karasu) some three miles from its mouth, near the 
point where it flows out of Lake Prasias or Cer- 
cinitis. It lay on a terraced hill, protected on the 
N., W. and S. by the river, on the E. by a wall 
(Thuc. iv.l02), while its harbor-town of Eion 
lay on the coast close to the river's mouth. The 
name is derived either from its being nearly sur- 
rounded by the stream or from its being conspicuous 
on every side, a fact to which Thuoydides draws 
attention (I.e.). It was at first called Ennea Hodoi, 
Nine Ways, a name which suggests its importance 
both strategically and commercially. It guarded 
the main route from Thrace into Macedonia and 
later became an important station on the Via 
Egnatia, the great Rom road from Dyrrhachium 
on the Adriatic to the Hebrus (Maritza), and it 
was the center of a fertile district producing wine, 
oil, figs and timber in abundance and enriched by 
gold and silver mines and considerable manu- 
factures, especially of woolen stuffs. In 497 BC 
Aristagoras, ex-despot of Miletus, tried to settle 
there, and a second vain attempt was made in 465- 
464 by the Athenians, who succeeded in founding 
a colony there in 437 under the leadership of Hag- 
non. The population, however, was too mixed 
to allow of strong Athenian sympathies, and in 
424 the town fell away to the Spartan leader Brasi- 
das and defied all the subsequent attempts of the 
Athenians to recover it. It passed imder the pro- 
tectorate of Perdiccas and Philip of Macedon, and 
the latter finally made himseK master of it in 358. 
On the Rom partition of Macedonia after the battle 
of Pydna (168 BC) Amphipolis was made a free 
city and capital of Macedonia Prima. Paul and 
Silas passed through it on their way from Philippi 
to Thessalonica, but the narrative seems to preclude 
a long stay (Acts 17 1). The place was called 
Popolia in the Middle Ages, while in modern times 
the village of Neochori (Turkish, Yenikeui) marks the 
site (Leake, Northern Greece, III, 181 ff; Cousin^ry, 
Macidoine, I, 100 ff, 122 ff; Heuzey et Daumet, 
Mission archiol. de Macedoine, 165 ff). 

Makctjs N. Tod 

AMPLIAS, am'ph-as {TB 'A(i,irX.i,as, Amplids). 
AV form: a contraction of Ampliatus (thus RV; 

AMPLIATUS, am-pli-a'tus ('A|\ioTos, S? abf, 
Amplidlos; 'AjiirXias, DELP, RV form; AV Am- 
plias): The name of a member of the Christian 
community at Rome, to whom Paul sent greetings 
(Rom 16 8). He is designated "my beloved in the 
Lord." It is a common name and is found in 
inscriptions connected with the imperial household. 
The name is found twice in the cemetery of Domi- 
tilla. The earlier inscription is over a cell which 
belongs to the end of the 1st or the beginning of the 
2d cent. The bearer of this name was probably 
a member of her household and conspicuous in the 
early Christian church in Rome. 

AMRAM, am'ram (Wyo^ , '■amram, "people 

(1) Father of Aaron, Moses and Miriam (Ex 6 
20; Nu 26 59; 1 Ch 6 3; 23 13); and a son of 
Kohath, the son of Levi (Ex 6 18; Nu 3 19, etc). 
It is not certain that he was literally the son of 
Kohatli, but rather his descendant, since there 
were ten generations from Joseph to Joshua 




(1 Ch 7 20-27), while only four are actually men- 
tioned from Levi to Moses for the corresponding 
period. Moreover the Kohathites at the time of 
the Exodus numbered 8,600 (Nu 3 28), which 
would therefore have been an impossibility if only 
two generations had lived. It seems best to regard 
Amram as a descendant of Kohath, and his wife 
Jochebed as a "daughter of Levi" in a general 

(2) One of the Bani, who in the days of Ezra 
had taken a foreign wife (Ezr 10 34). 

(3) In 1 Ch 1 41 (AV) for the properly read 
HAMRAN of the RV (H'?'^ , hamran), a Horite, 
who in Gen 36 26 is called IIemdan (q.v.). 

Edward Mack 
AMRAMITES, am'ram-its P'H'I'a?, 'amrami): 
The descendants of Amram, one of the Levitical 
families mentioned in Nu 3 27 and 1 Ch 26 23, 
who had the charge of the tabernacle proper, 
guarding the ark, table, candlestick, etc, called in 
1 Ch 26 22 "the treasures of the house of Jeh." 

AMRAPHEL, am'ra-fel, am-ra'fel (^STai? , 'am- 

rdphel, or, perhaps better, 'am'rdphel) : This name, 

which is identified with that of the re- 

1. The nowned Bab king Hammurabi (q.v.), is 
Expedition only found in Gen 14 1.9, where he is 
Against mentioned as the king of Shinar (Baby- 
Sodom and Ionia), who fought against the cities of 
Gom.orrali the plain, in alliance with Arioch king 

of Ellasar, Chedorlaomer king of Elam, 
and Tidal king of Nations (RV GOIIM). The 
narrative which follows is very circumstantial. 
From it we learn, that Bera king of Sodom, Birsha 
king of Gomorrah, Shinab king of Admah, She- 
meber king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela or 
Zoar, had served Chedorlaomer for 12 years, 
rebelled in the 13th, and in the 14th year Chedor- 
laomer, with the kings enumerated, fought with and 
defeated them in the vale of Siddim, which is 
described as being the Salt Sea. Previous to this 
engagement, however, the Elamites and their 
allies had attacked the Rephaim {Onkelos: "giants") 
in Ashtaroth-karnaim, the Zuzim (O: "mighty 
ones," "heroes") in Ham (O: Hamta'), the Emim 
(O: "terrible ones") in Shaveh-kiriathaim, and 
- the Horites in their Mount Seir, by the Desert. 
These having been rendered powerless to aid the 
revolted vassals, they returned and came to En- 
mishpat, or Kadesh, attacked the country of the 
Amalekites, and the Amorites dwelling in Hazazon- 
tamar (vs 2-7) . 

At this juncture the kings of the cities of the 
plain came out against them, and opposed them 

with their battle-array in the vale of 

2. The Siddim. The result of the fight was, 
Preparation that the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah, 
and the with their allies, fled, and fell among 
Attack the bitumen-pits of which the place 

was full, whilst those who got away 
took refuge in the mountain. All the goods and 
food (the camp-equipment and supplies) of the 
kings of the plain were captured by Chedorlaomer 
and his allies, who then continued their march 
(to their own lands) (vs 8-11). 

Among the captives, however, was Lot, Abram's 
nephew, who dwelt in Sodom. A fugitive, having 

escaped, went and announced the re- 

3. Abra- suit of the engagement to Abram, who 
ham's Res- was at that time living by Mamre's 
cue of Lot oak plantation. The patriarch immedi- 
ately marched forth with his trained 

men, and pursued them to Dan, where he divided 
his forces, attacked the Elamite-Bab army by night, 
and having put them to flight, pursued them again 
to Hobah, on the left (or N.) of Damascus. The 
result of this sudden onslaught was that he rescued 

Lot, with the women and people, and recaptured 
Lot's goods, which the allies of Amraphel had carried 
off (vs 12-16). 

There is no doubt that the identification of Amra- 
phel with the Hammm'abi of the Bab inscriptions is 
the best that has yet been proposed, 

4. Difflcul- and though there are certain difficulties 
ties of the therein, these may turn out to be ap- 
Identifica- parent rather than real, when we know 
tion of more of Bab history. The I at the end 
Amraphel of Amraphel (which has also ph instead 

of p or 6) as well as the fact that the 
expedition itself has not yet been recognized among 
the campaigns of Hammurabi, must be acknowledged 
as two points hard to explain, though they may 
ultimately be solved by further research. 

It is noteworthy, however, that in the first ver of 
Gen 14 Amraphel is mentioned first, which, if he be 

really the Bab Qammurabi, is easily 

5. Histori- comprehensible, for his renown to all 
cal Agree- appearance exceeded that of Chedor- 
ments laomer, his suzerain. In vs 4 and 6, 

however, it is Chedorlaomer alone who 
is referred to, and he heads the list of eastern kings 
in ver 9, where Tidal comes next (a quite natural 
order, if Goiim be the Bab Gutfi, i.e. the Medes). 
Next in order comes Amraphel, king of Babylonia 
and suzerain of Arioch of Ellasar {Eri-Aku of Larsa), 
whose name closes the fist. It may also be sug- 
gested, that Amraphel led a Bab force against Sodom, 
as the ally of Chedorlaomer, before he became king, 
and was simply crown prince. In that case, like 
Belshazzar, he was called "king" by anticipation. 
For further details see Arioch and Chedorlaomer, 
and cf Eri-Aku and {Iammtjrabi; for the history 
of Babylonia during Hammurabi's period, see that 
article. T. G. Pinches 

AMULET, am'a-let (?"''P|5 , k^mi'^', Diffinb , I'ha- 
shlm, npTp, m'zuzah, )-')>'B'ri , I'phillin, nS"'?, gisith; 
<t>u\aKT<ipiov, phulakterion) : Modern scholars are 
of opinion that our Eng. word amulet comes from 
the Lat amuletum, used by Pliny (Naturalis His- 
toria, xxviii, 28; xxx, 2, etc), and other Lat writers; 
but no etymology for the Lat word has been dis- 
covered. The present writer thinks the root exists 
in the Arab, himlat, "something carried" (see Dozy, 
Supplement aux Diclionnaires Arabes, I, 327), though 
there is no known example of the use of the Arab, 
word in a magical sense. Originally "amulet" de- 
noted any object supposed to have the power of 
removing or warding noxious influences believed to 
be due to evil spirits, etc, such as the evil eye, etc. 
But in the common usage it stands for an object 
worn on the body, generally hung from the neck, 
as a remedy or preservative against evil influences 
of a mystic kind. The word "amulet" occurs once 
in the RV (Isa 3 20) but not at all in the AV. 

The substances out of which amulets have been 
made and the forms which they have taken have 

been various. 
1. Classes (1) The commonest have consisted 
of Amulets of pieces of stone or metal, strips of 
parchment with or without inscriptions 
from sacred writings (Bible, Koran, etc). The 
earliest Egyp amulets ■ known • are pieces of green 
schist of various shapes — animal, etc. These were 
placed on the breast of a deceased person in order 
to secure a safe passage to the under-world. When 
a piece of stone is selected as an amulet it is always 
portable and generally of some striking fig. or shape 
(the human face, etc) . The use of such a stone for 
this purpose is really a survival of animism. 

(2) Gems, rings, etc. It has been largely held 
that all ornaments worn on the person were origi- 
nally amulets. (3) Certain herbs and animal prepa- 




rations; the roots of certain plants have been con- 
sidered very potent as remedies and preservatives. 

The practice of wearing amulets existed in the 
ancient world among all peoples, but esp. among 
Orientals; and it can be traced among most modern 
nations, esp. among peoples of backward civiliza- 
tion. Nor is it wholly absent from peoples of the 
most advanced civilization of today, the English, 
Americans, etc. Though the word charm (see 
Chaem) has a distinct meaning, it is often insep- 
arably connected with amulets, for it is in many 
cases the incantation or charm inscribed on the 
amulet that gives the latter its significance. As dis- 
tinguished from talisman (see Talisman) an amulet 
is believed to have negative results, as a means of 
protection: a talisman is thought to be the means of 
securing for the wearer some positive boon. 

Egyptian Amulets and Ear-rings. 

Though there is no word in the Heb or Gr Scrip- 
tures denoting "amulet," the thing itself is mani- 
festly implied in many parts of the 
2. Amulets Bible. But it is remarkable that the 
in the Bible general teaching of the Bible and esp. 
that of the OT prophets and of the 
NT writers is wholly and strongly opposed to such 
things. , , , 

(1) The Old Testament.— The golden ear-rmgs, 
worn by the wives and sons and daughters of the 
Israelites, out of which the molten calf was made 
(Ex 32 2f), were undoubtedly amulets. What 
other function could they be made to serve in the 
simple Ufe of the desert? That the women's orna- 
ments condemned in Isa 3 16-26 were of the same 
character is made exceedingly likely by an examina- 
tion of some of the terms employed. We read of 
moonlets and sunlets (ver 18), i.e. moon and sun- 
shaped amulets. The former in the shape of cres- 
cents are worn by Arab girls of our own time. The 
"ear-drops," "nose-rings," "arm chains" and "foot 
chains" were all used as a protection to the part of 
the body impUed, and the strong words with which 
their employment is condemned are only intelligible 
if their function as counter charms is borne in mind. 
In Isa 3 20 we read of Z^^asfeiOT rendered "ear-nngs" 
(AV) and "amulets" (RV). The Heb word seems 
to be cognate with the word for "serpent" (n'hashim; 
I and r often interchange), and meant probably 
in the first instance an amulet against a serpent 
bite (see Magic, Divination, and Demonology among 

the Hebrews and Their Neighbours, by the present 
writer, 50 f, 81; cf Jer 8 7; Eccl 10 11; Ps 58 5). 
Crescent-shaped amulets were worn by animals as 
well as human beings, as Jgs 8 21.26 shows. 

At Bethel, Jacob burned not only the idols 
("strange gods") but also the ear-rings, the latter 
being as much opposed to Yahwism as the former, 
on account of their heathen origin and import. 

InProv 17 StheHeb words rendered "a precious 
stone" (Heb "a stone conferring favor ) mean 
without question a stone amulet treasured on ac- 
count of its supposed magical efficacy. It is said in 
Prov 1 9 that wisdom will be such a defence to the 
one who has it as the head amulet is to the head and 
that of the neck to the neck. The words rendered 
in the RV "a chaplet of grace unto thy head" mean 
lit. "something bound to the head conferring favor," 
the one word for the latter clause being identical 
with that so rendered above (hen). The Talm 
word for an amulet (^^wi"') denotes something tied 
or bound (to the person). 

We have reference to the custom of wearing 
amulets in Prov 6 21 where the reader is urged 
to "bind them [i.e. the admonitions of father and 
mother] .... upon thy heart" and to "tie them 
about thy neck" — ^words implying a condemnation 
of the practice of trusting to the defence of mere 
material objects. 

Underneath the garments of warriors slain in 
the Maccabean wars amulets were found in the 
shape apparently of idols worshipped by their neigh- 
bors (2 Mace 12 40) . It is strange but true that 
like other nations of antiquity the Jews attached 
more importance to amulets obtained from other 
nations than to those of native growth. It is 
probable that the signet ring referred to in Cant 
8 6; Jer 22 24; Hag 2 23 was an amulet. It was 
worn on the heart or on the arm. 

(2) The phylacteries and the m.'zv,zdh. — There is 
no distinct reference to these in the OT. The Heb 
technical term for the former {t'phillln) does not 
occur in Bib. Heb, and although the Heb word 
m'zuzah does occur over a dozen times its sense is 
invariably "door-[or "gate-"] post" and not the 
amulet put on the door-post which in later Heb 
the word denotes. 

It is quite certain that the practice of wearing 
phylacteries has no Bib. support, for a correct exege- 
sis and a proper understanding of the context put it 
beyond dispute that the words in Ex 13 9.16; 
Dt 6 8f; 11 18-20 have reference to the exhorta- 
tions in the foregoing verses: "Thou shalt bind 
them [the commands previously mentioned] for a 
sign upon thy hand, and they shall be for frontlets 
between thy eyes. And thou shalt write them upon 
the door-posts of thy house, and upon thy gates" 
(Dt 6 8 f ) . The only possible sense of these words 
is that they were to hold the precepts referred to 
before their minds constantly as if they were in- 
scribed on their arms, held in front of their eyes, 
and written on the door- or gate-posts which they 
daily passed. That the language in Ex 13 9.16 
does not command the use of phylacteries is obvious ; 
and that the same is true of Prov 3 3; 6 21; 7 3 
where similar words are used is still more certain. 
Yet, though none of the passages enjoin the use 
of phylacteries or of the m'zUzah, they may all con- 
tain allusions to both practices as if the sense were, 
"Thou shalt keep constantly before thee my words 
and look to them for safety and not to the phylacter- 
ies worn on head and arm by the heathen." If, 
however, phylacteries were in use among the Jews 
thus early, it is strange that there is not in the OT 
a single instance in which the practice of wearing 
phylacteries is mentioned. Jos, however, seems 
to refer to this practice (Ant, IV, viii, 13), and it is 
frequently spoken of in the Mish (B'rahhdth, i, etc). 




It is a striking and significant fact that the Apoc 
is wholly silent as to the three signs of Judaism, 
phylacteries, the m'zuzah and the Qigith (or tassel 
attached to the corner of the prayer garment called 
tallith; cf Mt 9 20; 14 36 AV where "hem of the 
garment" is inaccurate and misleading). 

It is quite evident that phylacteries have a 
magical origin. This is suggested by the Gr name 
phulaklerion (whence the Eng. name) which in the 
1st cent, of our era denoted a counter charm or 
defence {phulasso, "to protect") against evil influ- 
ences. No scholar now explains the Gr word as de- 
noting a means of leading people to keep (phulasso) 
the law. The Heb name t'phillin ( = "prayers") 
meets us first in post-Bib. Heb, and carries with it 
the later view that phylacteries are used during 
prayer in harmony with the prayers or other formu- 
lae over the amulet to make it effective (see Budge, 
Egyptian Magic, 27) . See more fully under Charm . 

LiTERATUHE. — In addition to the lit. given in tlie course 
of tlie foregoing art., the following may be mentioned. 
On the general subject see the great works of Tyler (.Early 
HistoTy oj Mankind. Primitive Culture) and Frazer, Golden 
Bough; also the Series of arts, under "Charmsand Amulets" 
in Hastings' Enc of Religion and Ethics and the excellent 
article " Amulet" in the corresponding German work, Die 
Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart. See further the 
art. " Amulet " in Jew Enc, and on Egyp amulets, Budge, 
Egyptian Magic, 25 fl. 


AMZI, am'zl OTQ? , 'amgi, "my strength"): (1) 
A Levite of the family of Merari (1 Ch 6 46). (2) 
A priest of the family of Adaiah in the second temple. 
His father's name was Zechariah (Neh 11 12). 

ANAB, a'nab (^J?, 'anabh, "grapes"; B, 'AviJv, 
Anon or 'Aviip, Anob): Mentioned in the list of 
cities which fell to Judah (Josh 15 50). In the 
list it follows Debir, from which it was a short dis- 
tance to the S.W. It lay about twelve miles to 
the S.W. of Hebron. It was a city of the Anakim, 
from whom Joshua took it (Josh 11 21). Its site 
is now known as the ruin ^Anab. 

ANAEL, an'a-el ('Avo'^X, AnatV): A brother of 
Tobit mentioned once only (Tob 1 21) as the father 
of Achiacharus, who was an ofiioial in Nineveh 
under Esar-haddon. 

ANAH, a'na (Hjy , 'dnah, meaning uncertain; 
a Horite clan-name [Gen 36]) : 

(1) Mother of Aholibamah, one of the wives of 
Esau and daughter of Zibeon (cf Gen 36 2.14.18. 
25). The LXX, the Sam Pent, and the Pesh read 
"son," identifying this Anah with no. 3 (see below); 
Gen 36 2, read "^"iHn Qia-hon), for ''^.nn (^o- 

(2) Son of Seir, the Horite, and brother of Zibeon; 
one of the chiefs of the land of Edom (cf Gen 36 
20.21 = 1 Ch 1 38). Seir is elsewhere the name 
of the land (cf Gen 14 6; Isa 21 11); but here 
the country is personified and becomes the mythical 
ancestor of the tribes inhabiting it. 

(3) Son of Zibeon,"Thisis Anah who found the hot 
springs in the wilderness" (cf Gen 36 24 = 1 Ch 1 
40.41). The word D"''Q!'n , ha-yemim, occurs only 
in this passage and is probably corrupt. Ball 
{SBOT, Gen, crit. note 93) suggests that it is a 
corruption of CDTTl, W-hemam (cf Gen 36 22) 
in an earlier ver. Jerome, in his commentary on 
Gen 36 24, assembles the following definitions of 
the word gathered from Jewish sources: (1) "seas" 
aa though D"iJ9^, yammlm; (2) "hot springs" as 
though D"'TQn , hammlm; (3) a species of ass, 'J'^'H'J , 
y'mln; (4) "mules." This last explanation was 
the one most frequently met with in Jewish lit.; 
the tradition ran that Anah was the first to breed 
the mule, thus bringing into existence an unnatural 

species. As a punishment, God created the deadly 
water-snake, through the union of the common viper 
with the Libyan lizard (cf Gen Rabbah 82 15; 
Yer. Ber 1 126; Bab Pes 64a; Ginzberg, Monat- 
schrift, XLII, 538-39). 

The descent of Anah is thus represented in the 
three ways pointed out above as the text stands. 
If, however, we accept the reading 111, ben, for 
ri3 , bath, in the fixst case, Aholibamah will then be 
an unnamed daughter of the Anah of ver 24, not 
the Aholibamah, daughter of Anah of ver 25 (for 
the Anah of this verse is evidently the one of ver. 
20, not the Anah of ver 24). Another view is that 
the words, "the daughter of Zibeon," are a gloss, 
inserted by one who mistakenly identified the Anah 
of ver 25 with the Anah of ver 24; in this event, 
Aholibamah, the daughter of Anah, will be the one 
mentioned in ver 25. 

The difference between (2) and (3) is to be ex- 
plained on the basis of a twofold tradition. Anah 
was originally a sub-clan of the clan known as 
Zibeon, and both were "sons of Seir" — i.e. Horites. 

H. J. WoLP 

ANAHARATH, a-na'ha-rath (fTinSS, 'dna- 
harath, meaning unknown): A place which fell to 
the tribe of Issachar in the division of the land 
(Josh 19 19). Located in the valley of Jezreel 
toward the E., the name and site being preserved 
as the modern en-Na'Ura. BDB is wrong in assign- 
ing it to the tribe of Naphtali. 

ANAIAH, an-a-I'a, a-nl'a (H^jy, ^anayah, "Jah 
has answered"): (1) a Levite who assisted Ezr in 
reading the law to the people (Neh 8 4), perhaps 
the person called Ananias in Esd 9 43. (2) One of 
those who sealed the covenant (Neh 10 22). He 
may have been the same as Anaiah (1). 

ANAK, a'nak. See Anakim. 

ANAKIM, an'a-kim (Q'^pJ^, 'anajflm; 'EvaKiji, 
EnaHm, or 'EvoKe£|ji, Enakeim; also called "sons 
of Anak" [Nu 13 33], and "sons of the Anakim" 
[Dt 1 28]): The spies (Nu 13 33) compared them 
to the NephiUm or "giants" of Gen 6 4, and 
according to Dt 2 11 they were reckoned among 
the Rephaim (q.v.). In Nu 13 22 the chiefs of 
Hebron are said to be descendants of Anak, while 
"the father of Anak" is stated in Josh (15 13; 21 
11) to be Arba after whom Hebron was called "the 
city of Arba." Josh "cut off the Anakim .... from 

Hebron, from Debir, from Anab and from all 

the hill-country of Israel," remnants of them being 
left in the Phih cities of Gaza, Gath and Ashdod 
(Josh 11 21.22). As compared with the Israelites, 
they were tall like giants (Nu 13 33), and it would 
therefore seem that the "giant" Goliath and his 
family were of their race. At Hebron, at the time 
of the Israelitish conquest, we may gather that they 
formed the body-guard of the Amorite king (see 
Josh 10 5) under their three leaders Sheshai, Ahi- 
man and Talmai (Nu 13 22; Josh 15 14; Jgs 1 
20). Am Tab show that the Can princes were 
accustomed to surround themselves with body- 
guards of foreign mercenaries. It appears probable 
that the Anakim came from the Mgeav. like the 
Phihstines, to whom they may have been related. 
The name Anak is a masculine corresponding with 
a feminine which we meet with in the name of the 

§oddess Onka, who according to the Gr writers, 
tephanus of Byzantium and Hesychius, was the 
"Phoen," i.e. Syrian equivalent of Athena. Anket or 
Anukit was also the name of the goddess worshipped 
by the Egyptians at the First Cataract. In the name 
Ahi-man it is possible that -man denotes a non-Sem 
deity. A. H. Saycb 




ANAMIM, an'a-mim (C'lajy, ^&namvm): De- 
scendants of Mizraim (Gen 10 13; 1 Ch 1 11). See 
Table op Nations. 

ANAMMELECH, a-nam'e-lek {^^^'il, 'Unarrv- 
melekh = Assyr Anpr^malik, "Anu is the prince"): 
A Bab (?) deity worshipped by the Sepharvites in 
Samaria, after being transported there by Sargon. 
The worship of Adrammelech (who is mentioned 
with Anammelech) and Anammelech is accom- 
panied by the sacrifice of children by fire: "The 
Sepharvites burnt their children in the fire to 
Adrammelech and Anammelech, the gods of 
Sepharvaim" (2 K 17 31). This passage presents 
two grave difficulties. First, there is no evidence 
in cuneiform lit. that would point to the presence 
of human sacrifice, by fire or otherwise, as part of 
the ritual; nor has it been shown that the sculp- 
tures or bas-reliefs deny this thesis. Much depends 
upon the identification of "Sepharvaim"; if, as 
some scholars hold, Sepharvaim and Sippar are 
one and the same cities, the two deities referred to 
are Bab I But there are several strong objections 
to this theory. It has been suggested that Sephar- 
vaim (LXX, seppharin, sepphareimi) is rather 
identical with "Shabara'in," a city mentioned in 
the Bab Chronicle as having been destroyed by 
Shalmaneser IV. As Sepharvaim and Arpad and 
Hamath are grouped together (2 K 17 24; 18 34) 
in two passages, it is probable that Sepharvaim is 
a Syr city. Sepharvaim may then be another form 
of "Shabara'in," which, in turn, is the Assyr form 
of Sibraim (Ezk 47 16), a city in the neighborhood 
of Damascus (cf Hal6vy, ZA, II, 401 ff). One 
objection to this last is the necessity for representing 
D (?) by sh; this is not necessarily insurmountable, 
however. Then, the attempt to find an Assjt 
etjrmology for the two god-names falls to the ground. 
Besides, the custom of sacrifice by fire was preva- 
lent in Syria. Secondly, the god that was wor- 
shipped at Sippar was neither Adrammelech nor 
Anammelech but SamaS. It is improbable, as some 
would urge, that Adrammelech is a secondary title 
of the tutelary god of Sippar; then it would have to 
be shown that Anu enjoyed special reverence in this 
city which was especially consecrated to the worship 
of the Sun-god. (For "Anu" see Assyria.) It may 
be that the text is corrupt. See also Adrammelech. 

H. J. Wolf 
ANAN, a'nan Q^V , 'andn, "cloud"): (1) One 
of those who, with Neh, sealed the covenant (Neh 
10 26). (2) A returned exile (1 Esd 5 30). He is 
caUed Hanan in Ezr 2 46 and Neh 7 49. 

ANANI, a-na'ni C^Pjy, '&nani, perhaps a short- 
ened form of Ananiah, "Jehovah has covered"): 
A son of Elioenai of the house of David, who lived 
after the captivity (1 Ch 3 24). 

ANANLAH, an-a-ni'a (n,''?:^, 'Ananyah, "Je- 
hovah has covered"): (1) Grandfather of Azariah. 
He assisted in repairing the walls of Jerus after 
his return from the exile (Neh 3 23). (2)_ A town 
of Benjamin mentioned in connection with Nob 
and Hazor (Neh 11 32). It is commonly identified 
with Beit Hanina, between three and four miles 
N.N.W. from Jerus. 

ANANIAS, an-a-ni'as ('AvavCos; WH, 'Avavtas, 
Hananias; n^3:n , hdnanyah, "Jeh has been gra- 
cious"): The 'name was common among the Jews. 
In its Heb form it is frequently found m the 
OT (e.g. 1 Ch 25 4; Jer 28 1; Dnl 1 6). See 

H ANANI AH. , ,^^ TT J 

Husband of Sapphira (Acts 5 1-10). He and 
his wife sold their property, and gave to the com- 

mon fund of the church part of the purchase 

money, pretending it was the whole. When his 

hypocrisy was denounced by Peter, 

1. A Dis- Ananias fell down dead; and three 
ciple at hours later his wife met the same doom.